FORMERLY THE "You can't have it both ways!" THREAD! Now, the BLA BLA BLA Thread!
frankhardy
Posts: 8,097 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
A few years ago, I remember everybody whining that baseball needed more parity. I remember everybody crying (except Yankee fans) that the Yankees had an unfair advantage. Everybody said that baseball was too predictable.
Now, fast forward to the postseason of 2006. Now, everybody is saying that the Cardinals don't deserve to even be in the playoffs, much less, win the World Series because they only won 83 games. The Cardinals battled injury, after injury, after injury. Starting with the post season, everybody was finally healthy (except the closer). If this would have been college basketball, it would have been a great story.
The bottom line is that we have have 7 different champions in baseball in the last 7 years. The NFL has never had that. To me, that is great parity. Sure, the TV ratings were down, but, to me, that is not the fault of baseball, or the Cardinals/Tigers matchup. The ratings are due to the fact that people have many, many more channels to watch. Plus, there is the internet that occupies time.
Here is an excellent article by Jason Stark that should be read.
Cardinals Are Improbable Champions
Now, fast forward to the postseason of 2006. Now, everybody is saying that the Cardinals don't deserve to even be in the playoffs, much less, win the World Series because they only won 83 games. The Cardinals battled injury, after injury, after injury. Starting with the post season, everybody was finally healthy (except the closer). If this would have been college basketball, it would have been a great story.
The bottom line is that we have have 7 different champions in baseball in the last 7 years. The NFL has never had that. To me, that is great parity. Sure, the TV ratings were down, but, to me, that is not the fault of baseball, or the Cardinals/Tigers matchup. The ratings are due to the fact that people have many, many more channels to watch. Plus, there is the internet that occupies time.
Here is an excellent article by Jason Stark that should be read.
Cardinals Are Improbable Champions
Shane
0
Comments
The Cards are the champs. Under the current format a team does not win over the 162 game season it wins a championship when it is the best for the 3 series sprint.
I also have stated that baseball has 7 champs in 7 years and to me anyway that means that anything can happen and that is what makes baseball (under the current format) still the best.
great thread Frank.
Steve
Congrats to the Cardinals!!
One need to only look at the small market, small (relatively) spending teams over the past 5-10 years who have made the postseason, then look to see where they finished the next year (usually out of the playoffs).
If one continues to ignores the ills plaguing MLB, one is doomed to ignore the steady and rapid decline of the casual fan. The casual fan is what makes a sport profitable. The NFL has perfected the draw of the casual fan - and therefore it is (by far) the most popular and profitable sport in the US.
MLB will always appeal to the hardcore baseball fan - no matter how many craptacular teams there are in the league.
The ratings are down because MLB doesn't market the sport (like the NFL does) - they market only certain teams. This is baseball's biggest and most fundamental flaw. Go back to showcasing teams with lots of young talent, go back to showcasing classic rivalries on a national level (giants/dodgers for example), instead of ONLY the red sox and whoever, the yankees and whoever.
Sure, baseball has crowned 7 different champions over the last 7 years:
2005 white sox - 2006, did not qualify for postseason
2004 red sox - swept in first round 2005, did not qualify 2006 postseason
2003 - florida marlins, have not been back to postseason since
2002 - angels, out in 2003, swept in first round 2004, have not been back since
2001 - arizona, have not been to postseason since
2000 - yankees, highest payroll in MLB, been in postseason every year since
1999 - yankees, see above
1998 - yankees, see above
Having a significantly higher payroll than your competitors, and essentially 'buying off' small market teams with luxury tax money that the small market owners are more than willing to put in their pockets (and I don't blame them), means an easier path to the playoffs for high payroll clubs.
I can see it next year, Tigers will probably miss the playoffs, and this past season will have the "fluke" label!
Higher salaries does not mean you win, but yes, it does increase your chances.
Mike Illitch has owned the Tigers for almost 15 years (uncertain of the exact years), and even though he does have more money than I know what to do with, this is the first year in which he has actually made money with the Tigers. Hopefully the money he made, will open up his checkbook more and sign a key free agent or two. But if you are a high profile free agent, what team gives you the better odds at winning, of course it is the Yankees or Sox.
'Nuff said. A higher payroll gives you a competitive advantage over other teams-- and that's all anybody is saying.
And that's what everyone else is saying
No one watched the World Series in part because the Cardinals are such a mediocre team without a lot of big names to interest casual fans. The Tigers were a great story, and I was hoping they would get the title they deserved for such a great regular season, but they played just as poorly as the Cardinals did. It seemed like the winner of the Series this year was the team that played a bit less poorly than the other team.
Shane
<< <i>However, a high payroll doesn't guarantee a playoff spot.
And that's what everyone else is saying
What? I don't see that. Hardcorehockeyfan said "Higher payrolls may not mean you win, but it certainly increases your chance of getting to the big dance!.
Axtell said:"While spending lots of money doesn't guarantee you a championship, it sure as hell betters your chances at making the postseason."
Perkdog said: "Spending the cash does better your chances for a playoff spot but certainly does not gaurentee anything."
It's a big jump from 'increases your chances' or 'betters your chances' to 'guarantees you a playoff spot'. In any case, if anyone is saying that a relatively higher payroll 'guarantees' you anything then that person is a moron-- or, at the very least, is not looking at the evidence when they came to their conclusion. To say that your chances of reaching the postseason are increased by having a larger payroll is to simply state the obvious.
<< <i>Has nothing to do with parity..........the season is way too long. Numbers will always be down unless the Series finds two teams in the in it from the leading media markets in it and even then most of the country would still be bored with its length. 7 months is too much. >>
Not only the length of the season, but the amount of games and the time each game takes to play... 500+ hours of baseball a season for each team during the regular season. Snore!!! My A.D.D. cannot handle that. The 50 hours or so spent watching a season of football is more than plenty.
The
<< <i>Show me how the Cardinals played poorly? They just capitalized on the Tigers mistakes. Everybody said that the Cardinals are a bunch of no names with the exception of Pujols, yet Pujols, while he did ok, was not Pujols at his best. Well, those no names like Molina, Rolen, Eckstein, Suppan, Carpenter, and Edmonds stepped up BIG TIME. Something else that people are forgetting - the Cardinals have won 105 and 100 games in the previous two years with the same nucleous of players. I would hardly call that mediocre. >>
Not a knock, but 83 wins during the regular season is the very definition of mediocre. And while baseball fans may know those names, they are far from household names.
<< <i>
<< <i>Show me how the Cardinals played poorly? They just capitalized on the Tigers mistakes. Everybody said that the Cardinals are a bunch of no names with the exception of Pujols, yet Pujols, while he did ok, was not Pujols at his best. Well, those no names like Molina, Rolen, Eckstein, Suppan, Carpenter, and Edmonds stepped up BIG TIME. Something else that people are forgetting - the Cardinals have won 105 and 100 games in the previous two years with the same nucleous of players. I would hardly call that mediocre. >>
Not a knock, but 83 wins during the regular season is the very definition of mediocre. And while baseball fans may know those names, they are far from household names. >>
The 83 wins was due in large part to injuries. Show me how they were mediocre in the postseason when the team was healthy for the first time in months. In the month of April, they set a franchise record for the best start to a season, so it's not like this World Series was a fluke. This was a very good team that was injury plagued throughout the year, that got healthy and happened to come together at the right time.
Shane
<< <i>
The 83 wins was due in large part to injuries. >>
Inuries or not, 83 wins is mediocre.
<< <i>Show me how they were mediocre in the postseason when the team was healthy for the first time in months. In the month of April, they set a franchise record for the best start to a season, so it's not like this World Series was a fluke. This was a very good team that was injury plagued throughout the year, that got healthy and happened to come together at the right time. >>
Let's not overlook something here - the Cardinals were 11th in team spending this year, 3 million away from being #8.
<< <i>boopootts,
The
Sorry- first the Oilers debacle and now this. I should probably start PMing you before I resopnd to your messages, just so I can quit looking stupid
<< <i><<Let's not overlook something here - the Cardinals were 11th in team spending this year, 3 million away from being #8.>>
And let's not overlook the fact that the following teams all spent less than them and also made the playoffs:
Detroit
Minnesota
Oakland
San Diego
Once again, with 4 additional spots, small market teams have a WAY better chance of making the post season that EVER before. That it's not the socialistic every team take a turn system that you would endorse does not mean that the system isn't more fair than it's ever been. >>
And I have shown in past posts, that small market and small payroll teams simply do not make the playoffs consistently.
<< <i>Dude, seriously, did you even graduate from the 1st grade or were you thrown out of school while still in kindergarten? >>
Ok, when I see idiotic remarks like this start off a post, you've lost any and all credibility. Throw in the fact you're a yankee 'fan', and the obvious bias that comes with it when it comes to payroll, you've got nothing I want to hear.
<< <i>There are 30 teams. 8 will make the playoffs in any given year. That means EVERY year, 22 teams don't make the playoffs. Considering ~15-20 teams are considered "small" market teams, naturally, MOST of the teams not making the playoffs will be small market. But rest assured, there are plenty of "big" market team that don't make it as well.
>>
The only argument on this topic seems to come from these so-called yankee 'fans' who rant and rave that their $200+ million payroll doesn't help them (I include you in this simple-minded group).
<< <i>The playoffs are a zero sum game and NO ONE on this forum has ever disputed the idea that having more money is not an advantage. >>
Uhm, yes they have. I suggest you re-read any number of yankee 'fan' posts on this very topic, suggesting because they haven't won the world series, their obscene payroll hasn't helped. Truth be told, IT HAS HELPED.
<< <i> You claim that baseball is in trouble but the franchise values since the 1970s have done SIGNFICANTLY better than the stock market, home values, or any form of legitimate investment. >>
No one disputed the owners aren't making money - but do you think the ownership of the d'rays, for example, is pocketing more money from (a) luxury tax money by steinbrenner, or (b) revenue from his club? If you think it's (b), I have a bridge I'd like to see you.
<< <i> As for the disparity in purchasing power, that is why it costs SO MUCH LESS to buy a small market team. And that is why it would take $1 billion to buy the Yankees. It may not be fair, but the people who put their actual MONEY behind the teams (the owners) know EXACTLY what they're signing up for. >>
Yes, the owners of small market (and small revenue) teams know they are going to get tens of millions from teams in payola. What's your point in all this? None of your rambling and incoherent post states anything resembling a point.
<< <i>And I have shown in past posts, that many BIG market and BIG payroll teams simply do not make the playoffs consistently. >>
Really? If you are top 10 in payroll, your odds of making the playoffs are significantly higher than those in the bottom 20.
<< <i>Just because the Yanks have done it recently and you clearly hate them more than anything, don't make a blanket implication that all big markets are doing so well. The fact is, even MOST of the big markets FAIL. >>
MOST of the big markets FAIL? hahahahahahah
Dude, you have NO idea WTF you're talking about...go back to sleep.
<< <i>Do you have a POINT in all that drivel or is it just the usual ignorant spew without any point other than to bash the Yankees? >>
No one is bashing the yankees.
Yet your post perfectly illustrates MY point about yankee 'fans' immediately getting defensive whenever the payroll topic is brought up - thank you for showing just how right I am.
<< <i>Who's getting defensive? Is it not enough that EVERY Yankee fan acknowledges that the Yankees have a payroll advantage? Do you want them to take up a collection and start a pledge drive to raise money for you small market teams?
>>
No, what would fix baseball and bring it back to the casual fan is a salary cap. But the owners and players are all making money, it's the fans who are left out in the cold.
<< <i>And for the record, I can't recall one instance when I ever thought you were "right" about anything. >>
Like I give a chit what you think, troll.
No one mentioned the yankees, we were talking payroll in generalities. I can't help it if you yankee 'fans' get defensive immediately when payroll is discussed. Unlike your assertion, the common feeling among yankee fans on this board is the huge disparity in payroll really doesn't mean much in the grand scheme of things. You all are impossible to admit that having unlimited resources makes a huge difference in your success, and your ability to cover up terrible moves (i.e. Jaret Wright, Carl Pavano, etc) with more free agent signings.
<< <i>You are truly one of the most idiotic people I have ever seen post. You ramble on and on incoherently spewing garbage with no facts thinking that your opinion (which is worthless) is some basis of fact.
Get a clue idiot! >>
Well I'm sorry you can't see the light, son.
The yankees are all that are wrong with MLB, and why people have turned away in droves from it. What fun is it to watch teams with such a competitive disadvantage? You're right - it's no fun at all. That's why baseball will continue to fall, and fall, and fall, until it's even more of a niche sport than hockey.
Good luck with that anger management issue, son, you'll need it to get through your high school years.
<< <i>Axtell, I really want to thank you. Seriously. Because just knowing you on these forums has given me a wonderful gift in this world. And that is, that if I ever feel bad about anything in the future, I can at least take great comfort in the fact that I'm not you. >>
I'm glad you're not me.
Your brain would explode if you weren't drunk on yankee koolaid 24 hours a day.
Now, GTFO out of here, dipchit, and get to bed. You've got a bus to catch in the morning, son.
<< <i>No one mentioned the yankees, we were talking payroll in generalities. I can't help it if you yankee 'fans' get defensive immediately when payroll is discussed. >>
<< <i>The yankees are all that are wrong with MLB >>
FLIP-FLOP!
<< <i>
<< <i>No one mentioned the yankees, we were talking payroll in generalities. I can't help it if you yankee 'fans' get defensive immediately when payroll is discussed. >>
<< <i>The yankees are all that are wrong with MLB >>
FLIP-FLOP!
Really? Why don't you put that quote into context, idiot.
baseball got his panties all up in a bunch, and mentioned the yankees. Only then did I use them as a specific example.
Are you always this retarded, or do you take lessons?
Jesus man grow a brain already.
At some point, you have to look in the mirror and realize that YOU are the reason that virtually everyone on these boards despises you and has no respect for anything you spew.
And how do you respond? With the same old recycled witless comments and asinine rejoinders.
Entertaining, sure, but sad.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Looks like the hypocrite has found yet someone else to bicker back and forth with. Does it ever end with you, Axhole? >>
It would end with YOU if you took back your slanderous post calling me a racist, and then I'd never respond to you ever again, but you turned that idea down because you need to beat down.
<< <i>At some point, you have to look in the mirror and realize that YOU are the reason that virtually everyone on these boards despises you and has no respect for anything you spew. >>
Well I can't help that a vast majority of those are ny 'fans' who can't comprehend what criticism of their team sounds like.
<< <i>And how do you respond? With the same old recycled witless comments and asinine rejoinders.
Entertaining, sure, but sad. >>
If I am, as you say 'witless' and 'sad', then what does that say about YOU who chooses to respond to such a poster?
Talk about sad! You take the cake, clown.
You yankee 'fans' and axtell haters have shown up in droves to ruin yet another thread. Good work fellas!
<< <i>I hope you know more about hockey than you apparently know about baseball. >>
Yeah, I forgot, just because I like hockey much more than baseball, it means that I know absolutely nothing about baseball. When I vote Republican next Tuesday, I suppose I will also know nothing about voting either!
<< <i>Well I'm done with this thread. When baseball showed up and thought it was about the yankees (hey, it started about the cardinals you simple minded twit) then the thread was ruined.
You yankee 'fans' and axtell haters have shown up in droves to ruin yet another thread. Good work fellas! >>
C'mon Ax, you know that New York is the center of the world, and the ONLY baseball news comes from that rat infested gutter. If anything is mentioned about baseball, it HAS to be about the Yankees or Mets! Was that Subway Series awesome this year? Hell, next year, instead of playing out the season, just let the Yankees and Mets play each other 162 times, that is what EVERYone wants to see!
Steve
<< <i> C'mon Ax, you know that New York is the center of the world, and the ONLY baseball news comes from that rat infested gutter. >>
Oh looooky here! Yet another gutless wonder who will say whatever it takes to be noticed all the way behind his whittle computer screen. This great great citizen of the upper midwest
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
<< <i>
<< <i>I hope you know more about hockey than you apparently know about baseball. >>
Yeah, I forgot, just because I like hockey much more than baseball, it means that I know absolutely nothing about baseball. When I vote Republican next Tuesday, I suppose I will also know nothing about voting either! >>
That would be correct.
Nah... It's always been this easy.
Axhole, you proved that long before even I realized it, hypocrite!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Oh looooky here! Yet another gutless wonder who will say whatever it takes to be noticed all the way behind his whittle computer screen. This great great citizen of the upper midwest
Looks like Queen Dope has an admirer!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Just the other day you said that the person who got banned from the NBA did so because the player he refferred to as a monkey was black. That is was the only reason. I suggest you take a long look in the mirror Axhole as you are a racist. (among other things)
Stown yes it has always been this easy owning dopey.
Steve
<< <i>Why should he take back calling you a racist? You are one. It was proven here that day when you went back and forth with Perry. >>
Nothing was ever 'proven' you buffoon. I am white, and called pandrews a wanna be rapping white boy. Hardly a 'racist' comment, moron.
<< <i>Just the other day you said that the person who got banned from the NBA did so because the player he refferred to as a monkey was black. That is was the only reason. I suggest you take a long look in the mirror Axhole as you are a racist. (among other things) >>
hahahaha now you're using my 'look in the mirror' line? hahahahahahahahahahaha
<< <i>Stown yes it has always been this easy owning dopey. >>
dopey, again? /sigh jesus h. christ you need new material!!!!
Steve
<< <i>Yeah dopey everything is your line. I remm it differently. >>
I never claimed it as my line, you retard. Why don't you pull your head out of your ass already?
<< <i> You are IMO a racist, your comments have shown me that you are. >>
Well since you are unable to comprehend even the most basic of statements, you can't be expected to understand this.
You didn't? I guess you just 'errored' and I await your retraction.
Then what is this?
hahahaha now you're using my 'look in the mirror' line? hahahahahahahahahahaha
Sure looks like you 'errored'
Steve
<< <i>
You didn't? I guess you just 'errored' and I await your retraction.
>>
Retraction? Retract *this*, moron.
edit: PS: piss off.
You know what your problem is, Tinkerbell?
You spin so much that you end up forgetting what you had said and it comes back in serious ownage.
Do yourself a favor and just go away, please
ok I'll bite. lets see you slime your way out of this.
You posted:
hahahaha now you're using my 'look in the mirror' line? hahahahahahahahahahaha
Five minutes later you stated:
I never claimed it as my line, you retard. Why don't you pull your head out of your ass already?
Hmmm sure looks like you did to me.
Steve
No self control I see axhole. thought you was done with this thread?
i also see you are getting frustrated here, swearing now too dopie?
mommy won't like that.
steve
<< <i>i also see you are getting frustrated here, swearing now too dopie? >>
He edited it before I had a chance to quote the post.
That's a bad, bad, bad Tinkerbell.
The line you 'stole' that isn't mine is the entire 'dopey' thing...bri is the one who started all that crap.
wp-
what happened to you leaving and coming back later? Couldn't resist huh?
LOL No kidding. Isn't that exactly what I quoted you on? Is that not exactly what i had said? I think you are punch drunk axhole from all the schooling you been getting today.
twisting a tad here huh dopey?
so, lets see, you say ' earlier in the day' then in the same breath you say 10 minutes later. quick now get the lies straight. was it earlier in the day or 10 minutes later?
And I never said (in this post i was leaving) You did though, You actually said on Thursday November 02, 2006 12:49 AM " Well I'm done with this thread".
Now you may be thinking that my quote of you was me saying that i was done with the thread, that makes sense especially since you are a dope and have trouble following what has been said.
With that i'll await your twist on how you were misread or didn't mean what you said or whatever crap you will wind up coming up with.
.............earlier in the day, <exhale> 10 minutes later.
lol
this is just too easy. it is not fair.
ps: show me where in this post I said i was leaving?
you can't can you?
stownie is right you twist and lie so much you have no idea what you say anymore.
owned again....ooops can I say that?
Steve