Sports Parity

[Kevin W.]

Was dfwabel cloned?

[The_Admiral]

Was dfwabel cloned?

Have you ever seen Multiplicity?

[Kramerica Industries]

Maybe we should concern ourselves more with CCSLC parity.

[crashcarson15]

If we want to accurately compare parity in the United States to parity in the Premier League, we should make a point of looking at which teams finish top of their conferences year-in, year-out in the regular season, as the Premier League does not have the inherent randomness of playoffs to "help" with parity. Odds are, there would be more than five EPL winners if, say, an eight-team play-off was instituted at the end of the season.

Starting with baseball, in the past 10 years, the American League "regular season champion" has been the Red Sox or Yankees 7 times. The White Sox, Angels, and Rays are the three other teams, meaning that in 9/10 years the AL "winner" under an EPL-like setup would have been a big market team.

As far as the National League goes, parity is a little better. The Cardinals have won the NL regular season thrice and the Phillies twice, with the Mets, Diamondbacks, Cubs, Dodgers, and Nationals all having one. However, if you include the Cards as a "big market" team due to their status as a traditional power (see Liverpool?), a big-market team has still won the NL regular season 8/10 or 9/10 seasons depending on how you define Washington.

Moving onto the NBA, the Eastern Conference has seen the Heat win the regular season twice, the Bulls win it twice, the Cavs win it twice, the Pistons win it twice, the Celtics once, and the Pacers (in 2004) once. It would actually be a fun debate as to whether or not this shows parity—the last five "regular season champions" have been teams led by either LeBron James or Derrick Rose—as the trend is inching towards less of it.

The Western Conference, however, certainly seems to have less parity, with the Lakers and Spurs each holding 6 of the last 10 #1 seeds. The Thunder have one, as do the Mavs, Suns, and Timberwolves—all of those coming in 2007 or earlier. The Thunder, Spurs, and Lakers are the only teams to do it in the last 6 years, potentially indicative of a greater NBA trend.

The NHL's Eastern Conference definitely has had parity in the regular season over the last 10 (played) seasons, with only the Capitals and Senators holding the #1 seed twice. Other teams to do so include Pittsburgh, the Rangers, Boston, Montreal, Buffalo, and Tampa Bay. Very, very balanced.

The NHL's Western Conference on the other hand hasn't had as much parity—the Stars and Blackhawks each have one, bookending runs of 2 by the Canucks and Sharks and the Red Wings' four-year run. Certainly less balanced which is, well, interesting.

The NFL's an interesting case. As far as the AFC goes, the Patriots have 4 of the last 10 regular season crowns while the Colts also had two thrown in there. Denver, Tennessee, San Diego, and Pittsburgh each have one to round things out.

The NFC on the other hand has seen just two teams win it twice—the Eagles at the beginning of the run and the Falcons in 2010 and 2012. Otherwise, Green Bay, New Orleans, the Giants, Dallas, Chicago, and Seattle all have done it once.

I'm actually not sure what I've shown here—other than reinforcing that the major difference between the EPL and American sports is a draft (or lack thereof)?

Spoiler'd a lot of words about specifically who's won each conference in the regular season over the last 10 years in sports.

I think, going back and looking at it, that the EPL is very comparable to the American League as far as the regular season is concerned. One can think of Manchester United as the Yankees (4 titles) and for the time being, Chelsea as the Red Sox (3 titles) and you'll get similar results. Throw in your singular Manchester City title as comparable to, say, the White Sox, your Arsenal as comparable to the Angels, and then there's just the Rays' oddball win that we can compare to Blackburn and call it a day.

[The Six]

Because a system without a salary cap where the big market teams can just buy whoever they want whenever they want is sooooooooo fair.

Of course it is. It's their money. Why can't they spend it? It even makes sense economically. They are in bigger cities, so they have more fans. When that team wins, more revenue is generated for the league because of the larger fanbase. Revenue sharing splits part of that, so all teams benefit.

The Orioles weren't horrible for decades because they were a poor small market team that couldn't spend enough to keep up. They were horrible because they had dumbass management that didn't know how to operate a competitive team. And if they were a richer team, they still would have been horrible, just with more overpriced contracts. That they've turned it around now is no accident; they've started to build a team properly. There are so many examples of teams with tons of money that don't know how to spend it (Angels, Mets...).

Every league has perpetual bottom-feeders, so why people think that a cap will magically make the Kansas City Royals perennial contenders is a mystery. I'd rather see some teams miss the playoffs a few years in a row, that have great teams forcibly broken up by the cap.

[TalktoChuck]

Normally, I'm all for a salary cap and more parity. But I would have absolutely no problem if baseball didn't have one. I liked the whole rich v. poor of baseball. It's unorthodox, it's unfair, and it's capitalism at it's finest. And it was still very possible for the small market teams to win, they just needed to hire smart personnel people.

I know I'm in the minority here, but it's just one of those weird baseball quirks that I grew to love, much like the DH. I am also against integrating the AL and NL, I liked when they were separate leagues who only meet for the World Series. I'm ok with a week or two of inter-league play, but I hated the idea of moving Houston to the AL having season long inter-league play.

[The_Admiral]

I had always been anti-cap in baseball but the disparity in payrolls has gone beyond what can be considered acceptable. I just can't help having reservations about a system where the lowest team is spending 10% of the what the highest team spends. That's too much. Even 30% would be fine by me.

[mania]

The new CBA could level the playing field a bit in baseball, but it will take years to ascertain, and on top of that, the payroll disparity has gotten to the point where there probably does need to be more than just the luxury tax.

You couldn't save the NBA if you tried.

I actually think the new CBA was a major, major step back for parity. By basically :censored:ing over the amateur process, you're no longer allowing smaller teams to focus as much effort and money on the thing that would help them the most, pre-arbitration players contributing.

It makes basically the only real way to improve your team the free agent market, which benefits the big market teams.

[Kramerica Industries]

Very much that, actually. Teams can't very easily sign players over slot in the draft anymore and can't spend significant sums of money in the IFA field (not to mention MLB's ambition to have a world draft; good luck with that, guys). The CBA isn't much help.

What's gonna have to be the trick are the added television revenues. Extra money coming into every team and very few places to spend it. Hello more 3/$12M deals for the likes of Jeff Keppinger!

[buzzcut]

Beckett:

Max or idiot?

Continue voting.

I vote for both options; if it's legal to do so.

[FGM13]

Beckett:

Max or idiot?

Continue voting.

I vote for both options; if it's legal to do so.

Very much legal, as both answers are correct.

[ElwoodCuse]

Baseball's solution to "parity" is to continue the farce of the big market teams overspending but just keep adding more rounds of crapshoot playoffs so maybe someone else can sneak into the World Series.

The whole "how many different teams" or "the richest team doesn't always win" thing is a red herring. The simple fact is the Yankees/Red Sox/Dodgers are playing different games than the Pirates/Rays/Royals when it comes to signing free agents, keeping developed talent, recovering from mistakes, etc.