Baseball Fans In The Playground

[Hazyshade]

Happy Opening Day, baseball fans everywhere except Boston, Baltimore and parts of NYC!

So, how will your team be faring this year?

I reckon the Blue Jays' rookie players will all emulate Ricky Romero and have unbelievable seasons, Vernon Wells will remember which end of the bat to hit the ball with, we'll make a clean sweep of our interleague games including a four-run first inning against Halladay (just like in spring training :smallbiggrin:) Alex Anthopolous will sign up an unknown Cuban 3rd baseman at the deadline who goes on to hit .320, and we will storm to a winning season and only finish about 20 games back in the AL East!

I'm gonna say Washington Nationals for the championship, with Strasburg pitching World Series games 1, 4, 7, 3, 6, 2 and 5 in that order.

[evil-frosty]

I am cubbies fan till i die. I dont think they are going to do that well, but at least Zambrano is taking it seriously now.

Also i feel sorry for Strasburg he is a great pitcher but he is on a crap team like the Nationals. And i dont have a prediction for the world series. Never do.

[SensFan]

BoSox are much improved over last year, and probably easily take the division.
In the NL, hard to see who can overtake the Phillies.

[PhoeKun]

Also i feel sorry for Strasburg he is a great pitcher but he is on a crap team like the Nationals. And i dont have a prediction for the world series. Never do.

It's really only a downside for him if they sit him on a white horse and demand he rides to their rescue. He's not ready for the major leagues yet, but as long as he's allowed to actually develop and they take steps to protect his arm, he can grow into an ace pitcher. He's young, and if they don't blow him out now he won't be entering his prime until after he's worth too much money for the Nationals to keep him on staff, and they'll trade him to a contender to avoid losing him for nothing in free agency.

Baseball is a little bit different than other sports in that you won't murder yourself trying to play for a crappy team. If Strasburg can hack it at all, he'll survive his tenure in Washington.


BoSox are much improved over last year, and probably easily take the division.
In the NL, hard to see who can overtake the Phillies.

The AL East is too stacked for winning it to be easy for anybody. I do think they'll be able to win it, but I think it's going to be a fairly close race. Close enough at least that I expect to hear a lot of complaining later in the year from Yankees fans about the season starting and ending in Fenway. Not that I will show them any sympathy. :smalltongue:

The Phillies are catchable enough. If I had to pick one team to do it, it would be the Cardinals.

[skywalker]

Also i feel sorry for Strasburg he is a great pitcher but he is on a crap team like the Nationals. And i dont have a prediction for the world series. Never do.

The way crap teams turn into great teams is by acquiring players like Strasburg. That's the theory behind the draft going the way it does.

The problem with this idea in baseball is that the players are basically, as Bill Simmons said, "Strat-O-Matic cards with arms and legs." Each player is basically a stat generating machine, and the best machines cost the most. The teams with the highest payrolls (*cough*ALEAST*cough*) can afford more of the best machines, which means over the course of a season (and over the course of several seasons) they're much more likely to win.

What this really boils down to is, the Nationals spend a long time carefully nurturing and developing Strasburg, making sure he becomes a big-time big league ace, and then the Yankees buy him when he hits free agency.


BoSox are much improved over last year, and probably easily take the division.
In the NL, hard to see who can overtake the Phillies.

Some people (in Philly, no less) have actually picked my Braves to knock off the Phillies in the division. I'm less than convinced.

[PhoeKun]

The way crap teams turn into great teams is by acquiring players like Strasburg. That's the theory behind the draft going the way it does.

The problem with this idea in baseball is that the players are basically, as Bill Simmons said, "Strat-O-Matic cards with arms and legs." Each player is basically a stat generating machine, and the best machines cost the most. The teams with the highest payrolls (*cough*ALEAST*cough*) can afford more of the best machines, which means over the course of a season (and over the course of several seasons) they're much more likely to win.

What this really boils down to is, the Nationals spend a long time carefully nurturing and developing Strasburg, making sure he becomes a big-time big league ace, and then the Yankees buy him when he hits free agency.

It does work out on occasion, but it requires a few more factors than in other sports. If you look at the Rays, you see a team that's doing very well for itself because of developed young talent. They certainly don't have the cash to go around buying all of their talent, because people in Tampa continue to not give a crap about baseball. It's sad.

And the Florida Marlins have managed to win a World Series with an owner who is hell bent on spending as little money as humanly possible while still technically fielding a major league team.

What small and mid market teams need is a combination of things. They can't be too timid with developing their draft picks, or the scenario we both pointed out will happen every time. But if they push too hard, they'll probably implode the poor kids. So it's a balancing act of picking the spot in their initial contract when they can have an impact at a reasonable price, while surrounding these stars of the future with a solid framework of inexpensive but productive players. Ideally, a team like the Nationals can convince a major talent to come in and take a hit to their salary for the chance to save the franchise and become a god.

What's really not fair about the whole setup is that mid-market teams have to work much harder than the big-market teams to earn their window, and that window will be slammed shut a lot faster, requiring the whole dance to be set up again to produce another shot at a title. Even when it looks like you've built your team to be a heavy hitter for years at a maintainable rate, the whole thing comes crashing down and you find yourself needing to start over. the '07 Indians spring to mind. You can't win with just money (you need to know what you're doing), but having all the excess money means you get to cover up your mistakes quickly and never lose more than a year's worth of contention because of a boneheaded move.



Some people (in Philly, no less) have actually picked my Braves to knock off the Phillies in the division. I'm less than convinced.

I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. No offense. <.<

[Hazyshade]

Everyone points to the Rays as an example of what a small-market team can achieve. Who wants to be the next Rays? To be the laughing stock of baseball for a decade so they can get a bunch of high draft picks and have one shot at the championship? The thing is, the Rays got away with it because, well, they'd budgeted for an average attendance of 0. So did the Marlins. Toronto can't even use the word "rebuilding" to describe what they're doing this season - they have a fanbase to keep happy in what is hardly a baseball heartland. They, and the Pirates and the Royals and the Reds and the Padres, will just keep pootling along, never quite contending, never quite sucking bad enough to bring in a Strasburg.

As I'm typing this, Texas have just hit the tying run of our closer in the bottom of the 9th, and have now loaded the bases with one out and the player with MLB's longest ever surname at bat. Go on lad, ground into a double play...

...nope, sac fly, Texas win by one. It was nice knowing you .500, I wonder if we'll meet again...

[Mando Knight]

I am cubbies fan till i die.Poor you. :smalltongue:
I dont think they are going to do that well, but at least Zambrano is taking it seriously now.
Yeah, can't ruin that 100-year precedent now. :smallwink::smalltongue:

Cardinals (http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/index.jsp?c_id=stl) and El Hombre (http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=405395) all the way.

[evil-frosty]

Can i take back what i said about Zambrano? Cause he is sucking majorly. Currently he has an ERA of 54, which is hilarious if depressing to me.

[skywalker]

It does work out on occasion, but it requires a few more factors than in other sports. If you look at the Rays, you see a team that's doing very well for itself because of developed young talent. They certainly don't have the cash to go around buying all of their talent, because people in Tampa continue to not give a crap about baseball. It's sad.

And the Florida Marlins have managed to win a World Series with an owner who is hell bent on spending as little money as humanly possible while still technically fielding a major league team.

What small and mid market teams need is a combination of things. They can't be too timid with developing their draft picks, or the scenario we both pointed out will happen every time. But if they push too hard, they'll probably implode the poor kids. So it's a balancing act of picking the spot in their initial contract when they can have an impact at a reasonable price, while surrounding these stars of the future with a solid framework of inexpensive but productive players. Ideally, a team like the Nationals can convince a major talent to come in and take a hit to their salary for the chance to save the franchise and become a god.

What's really not fair about the whole setup is that mid-market teams have to work much harder than the big-market teams to earn their window, and that window will be slammed shut a lot faster, requiring the whole dance to be set up again to produce another shot at a title. Even when it looks like you've built your team to be a heavy hitter for years at a maintainable rate, the whole thing comes crashing down and you find yourself needing to start over. the '07 Indians spring to mind. You can't win with just money (you need to know what you're doing), but having all the excess money means you get to cover up your mistakes quickly and never lose more than a year's worth of contention because of a boneheaded move.

I think the smaller teams had a period there where they could win by going more in depth with the stats (OPS, etc). But I think over the past few years, the bigger teams have wised up to Sabermetrics. Which is why you have seen the Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals, etc. return to the playoffs and the Series consistently.


I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. No offense. <.<

Oh I'm not. I think they have very good pitching and are decent defensively, but the offense is very, very suspect. Altho it doesn't seem so today!

EDIT:
As I'm typing this, Texas have just hit the tying run of our closer in the bottom of the 9th, and have now loaded the bases with one out and the player with MLB's longest ever surname at bat. Go on lad, ground into a double play...

Saltalamacchia. I love that guy. Braves gave him up in what was, in hindsight, one of the worst trades ever: A good, young, switch hitting catcher and 4 prospects for a year-long rental of a guy we couldn't afford and so had to get rid of.


Can i take back what i said about Zambrano? Cause he is sucking majorly. Currently he has an ERA of 54, which is hilarious if depressing to me.

No, it's the Braves incredible offense, that's all. :smallwink:

It's really Zambrano's temper that's the problem. Those two bad ball were all it took. He went nuclear. In this case, it probably would've been better for you guys if he wasn't taking it seriously.

[Ranger Mattos]

I am cubbies fan till i die.

*stares at*

I'm personally a Brewers fan (Wisconsin, duh), and even though I don't really follow the actual games much, I have good feelings for this year.

[Hazyshade]

I think the smaller teams had a period there where they could win by going more in depth with the stats (OPS, etc). But I think over the past few years, the bigger teams have wised up to Sabermetrics. Which is why you have seen the Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals, etc. return to the playoffs and the Series consistently.


You're absolutely right - Beane's A's haven't had a winning season since '06, and the Jays sacked his protegé Ricciardi for, well, basically being really really bad at managing a baseball club.

In the long run, Sabermetrics has basically entrenched the bigger teams' advantage by reducing the random elements. They've got the cash, and now they know which players to wave it at.

[PhoeKun]

I think the smaller teams had a period there where they could win by going more in depth with the stats (OPS, etc). But I think over the past few years, the bigger teams have wised up to Sabermetrics. Which is why you have seen the Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals, etc. return to the playoffs and the Series consistently.

It's definitely gotten more difficult for the smaller teams now that some of the bigger fish have wised up to the world of statistics (as a Red Sox fan, I welcome this revolution). But the wonderful thing about sabermetrics and baseball is that even though the biggest teams will usually grab up the biggest names, they don't have enough room on the roster to snag all of the good players. For every Albert Pujols, there is a Ben Zobrist. Which is not to call those two comparable players, but both of them will help you win games, and one of them costs a lot less (and will play for a team not from St. Louis).

If you can build a solid team around guys like that, then you will have a chance. The goal of a mid market team is to put together a team that is fun to watch (and hope you have a fanbase that doesn't do something stupid like demand you compete for a championship every year, 'cause it ain't happening), and wait for that one particular year where your guys take an extra step forward. When the trade deadline rolls around, you find a panicking team or two and hand over prospects for a major star with an expiring contract, and there's your chance at a championship.

Now, the unfortunate thing is that after that year, your core drops back to their usual selves, you lose the star (unless you get really lucky), and you need to start rebuilding your pool of prospects. And if you fall just short of victory, it's going to be a few years at least before you have another legitimate shot. I don't quite agree with that setup, but I'm not exactly sure how to fix it. It's just that I don't think the game is quite so impossible for the smaller markets to succeed as it's made out to be. And that there are options in between "spend $150 million" and "suck for ten years while you pick up a bunch of Strasburg types". You need a dedicated GM and an invested owner.

In other words, if your team can't win, it might not be because the big teams ate up all the talent. Your front office might suck. *coughs*

[SensFan]

Case in point: Blue Jays.

They are one of the smallest markets in the league, and deal in Canadian dollars, but I firmly believe that if they didn't play some stupid amount of games against Yanks/Sox, they'd compete in a 'normal' division. Look at the output they've gotten from guys like Lind, Hill, Romero, etc...

[snoopy13a]

Case in point: Blue Jays.

They are one of the smallest markets in the league, and deal in Canadian dollars, but I firmly believe that if they didn't play some stupid amount of games against Yanks/Sox, they'd compete in a 'normal' division. Look at the output they've gotten from guys like Lind, Hill, Romero, etc...

How is Toronto one of the smallest markets in the league?

Toronto has 2.5 million people in the city itself and 5.5 million in Greater Toronto according to the reliable source that is Wikipedia :smalltongue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Toronto_Area

This website puts Toronto right in the middle of baseball markets. Also note that the New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington D.C. markets are divided in two:

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/articles/baseball_markets.shtml

So, in order of size:

1a) Yankees 1/2 of 21.2 million (10.5)
1b) Mets 1/2 of 21 million (10.5)
3a) Dodgers 1/2 of 16.3 million (8.1)
3b) Angels 1/2 of 16.3 million (8.1)
5) Phillies 6.2 million
6) Red Sox 5.8 million
7) Tigers 5.5 million
8) Rangers 5.2 million
9) Blue Jays 4.6 million
10) Astros 4.6 million
11a) Cubs 1/2 of 9.1 million (4.6)
11b) White Sox 1/2 of 9.1 million (4.6)
13) Braves 4.1 million
14) Marlins 3.9 million
15a) Nationals 1/2 of 7.6 million (3.8)
15b) Orioles 1/2 of 7.6 million (3.8)
17) Mariners 3.5 million
18a) Giants 1/2 of 7.0 million (3.5)
18b) A's 1/2 of 7.0 million (3.5)
20) Diamondbacks 3.3 million
21) Twins 3.0 million
22) Indians 2.9 million
23) Padres 2.8 million
24) Cardinals 2.6 million
25) Rockies 2.6 million
26) Rays 2.5 million
27) Pirates 2.4 million
28) Reds 2.0 million
29) Royals 1.8 million
30) Brewers 1.8 million

[SensFan]

Canadian.

Dollars (evident).
Interest (HOCKEY HOCKEY AND MORE HOCKEY, then basketball and then baseball)

[SDF]

Saw some Twins games when living in MN. Like them but haven't followed in a few years. Had an uncle that pitched for the A's in the 80's, and he took me to some Giants games in the 90's. Lately living in the Pacific Northwest I've taken a liking to the Mariners.

[Hazyshade]

I agree with snoopy - though I wasn't exactly following baseball back then, from what I've read, no-one was calling the Jays a small-market team in the early 90s when they bought two WS titles and packed out SkyDome. Although they're in a hockey city, they've got two factors in their favour - hockey being a winter sport, and the fact that they're now the only team in Canada (their blackout area covers all of Canada, and last year when they played the Mariners in Seattle, their players were saying it felt like a home game because of all the fans that drove down from Vancouver, so they're not just Toronto's team - though you can maybe knock a few million off their potential market to allow for the anyone-but-Toronto phenomenon in the rest of Canada :smallsmile:)

But I also agree with SensFan about that crazy, crazy AL East. Toronto were 49-41 against non-div opponents in '09. (Take int£rl£ague play out too and they were 42-30.) Reducing the number of intra-division games = very yes. With the proviso that the Yankees and the Sox should be allowed to play each other as many times as they like :smallbiggrin:

EDIT - Having crunched the numbers, if we'd done as well as 49-41 against the AL East teams, we'd have scored 86 wins total - good enough to join the tiebreak in the AL Central. So it could have been us, and not the Twins, getting firmly banjoed by the Yankees in the DS... if only!

[BRC]

St Louis born and raised. Go Cardinals!

[snoopy13a]

I agree with snoopy - though I wasn't exactly following baseball back then, from what I've read, no-one was calling the Jays a small-market team in the early 90s when they bought two WS titles and packed out SkyDome. Although they're in a hockey city, they've got two factors in their favour - hockey being a winter sport, and the fact that they're now the only team in Canada (their blackout area covers all of Canada, and last year when they played the Mariners in Seattle, their players were saying it felt like a home game because of all the fans that drove down from Vancouver, so they're not just Toronto's team - though you can maybe knock a few million off their potential market to allow for the anyone-but-Toronto phenomenon in the rest of Canada :smallsmile:)

But I also agree with SensFan about that crazy, crazy AL East. Toronto were 49-41 against non-div opponents in '09. (Take int£rl£ague play out too and they were 42-30.) Reducing the number of intra-division games = very yes. With the proviso that the Yankees and the Sox should be allowed to play each other as many times as they like :smallbiggrin:

EDIT - Having crunched the numbers, if we'd done as well as 49-41 against the AL East teams, we'd have scored 86 wins total - good enough to join the tiebreak in the AL Central. So it could have been us, and not the Twins, getting firmly banjoed by the Yankees in the DS... if only!

What really hurt Canadian baseball was the strike. In the middle of 1994, Toronto was coming off back to back World Series wins and Montreal had the best record in the National League and a favorite to win the Series. If the strike doesn't happen, maybe the Expos win the World Series (and still exist) and the Blue Jays are still competing for first place. Instead, Canadian fans didn't come back after the strike as much as American fans did.

It is a little unfair that Toronto and Baltimore are stuck in the AL East. If the Blue Jays or Orioles had been in the AL Central or West, I'm pretty such they would have made the playoffs a couple of times. Maybe baseball should get rid of the divisions and have the top four teams in each league make the playoffs?

[Orzel]

Yankees won. I'm happy. I still miss Matsui.

[Hazyshade]

What really hurt Canadian baseball was the strike. In the middle of 1994, Toronto was coming off back to back World Series wins and Montreal had the best record in the National League and a favorite to win the Series. If the strike doesn't happen, maybe the Expos win the World Series (and still exist) and the Blue Jays are still competing for first place. Instead, Canadian fans didn't come back after the strike as much as American fans did.

It was over for Toronto by '94 - they had a losing record and out of the WAMCO hitting crew only Carter was on pace for 30 HRs. But I still shed a tear for the poor Expos fans. Damn strike.

Do you know why they chose to give BalWash a second doormat team, rather than move them permanently to Puerto Rico where they'd been drawing better crowds?



It is a little unfair that Toronto and Baltimore are stuck in the AL East. If the Blue Jays or Orioles had been in the AL Central or West, I'm pretty such they would have made the playoffs a couple of times. Maybe baseball should get rid of the divisions and have the top four teams in each league make the playoffs?

That would make a lot of sporting sense, but there's more television revenue to be made from a schedule that's skewed towards your home market's time zone. (And people would complain that they absolutely MUST see Yankees-Red Sox 18 times a season because it's SUCH a historic matchup.) I would go with a compromise - go back to two divisions in each league, east and west, with both division leaders plus two wildcards, which can be both from one division or one from each, making the playoffs.

Just for fun, I'm gonna see how this currently pans out geographically:

AL West
Seattle
Los Angeles Anaheim Angels of Anaheim Los Angeles USA Planet Earth
Oakland
Texas
Minnesota
Kansas City
White Sox(!)

AL East
Yankees
Toronto
Boston
Tampa
Baltimore
Detroit
Cleveland

NL West
Dodgers
Arizona
Colorado
San Diego
San Francisco
Houston
St. Louis
Milwaukee

NL East
Philadelphia
Washington
Florida
Mets
Atlanta
Cubs
Cincinnati
Pittsburgh

Assuming the Yankees and Red Sox are locks for the postseason, and let's say the Angels win the West, that leaves Toronto needing to beat out Minnesota, Detroit and Seattle for the last wildcard. Much more manageable!

[skywalker]

Do you know why they chose to give BalWash a second doormat team, rather than move them permanently to Puerto Rico where they'd been drawing better crowds?

The MLB travel schedule is already grueling (the only major sport left where teams occasionally take the bus between cities). Adding a trip to an island nation in a different time zone would be quite rough. Yes, the Marlins are playing one series there, but that's not the same. It would be hardest on the players for the Puerto Rican team, because going home during road trips would be much harder.

They would have been just as much of a doormat in PR as in DC, and whether or not attendance was better in PR than in DC is debatable.

Plus, in DC, you have a municipality that agreed to a new stadium, etc. And while PR is technically US territory, it's not the same as being in the same country, legally especially. I think there is also a move right now to consolidate teams in the country (NBA moved a Canadian team back to the US and I'm doubtful the threatened Buffalo Bills move will ever get done).

Last but not least, DC used to have a team, and there's always sentimentality for "bringing baseball back to *blank*!"

[snoopy13a]

Do you know why they chose to give BalWash a second doormat team, rather than move them permanently to Puerto Rico where they'd been drawing better crowds?



Initial large crowds in Puerto Rico were probably due to the novelty of it. For example, the Colorado Rockies drew over 4 million fans in their first season (1993)*.

Puerto Rico probably doesn't have the revenue base for a MLB team. Although the island has a population of 4 million, the median income is about $18,000:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_Rico

Honestly, there really aren't very many cities where baseball teams can relocate to (New York could support a third team but there's no way the Mets and Yankees would allow it). That's why the commissioner wanted to contract MLB and get rid of the Twins and Expos a few years ago.


* The only other teams to reach over 4 million fans were the 1991-1993 Toronto Blue Jays, the 2008 Mets and the 2005-2008 Yankees.

[Gaelbert]

Dodgers fan here. As for that chart above, I think the whole Dodgers/Angels placement is a little deceptive. Remember, no matter how much they want you to forget it, it is the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. The Dodgers do not share Los Angeles with them, although Southern California may be split fairly evenly.
Had my fantasy league draft the other day. Here's my stud line up, for those of you who are interested. Keep in mind though, wins and home runs are worth a ton whereas WHIP and stolen bases are worth almost nothing.
1B Ryan Howard
Kendry Morales

2B Dustin Pedroia
Ian Kinsler

SS Jimmy Rollins
Jason Bartlett

3B Evan Longoria
Casey Blake

C Joe Mauer
Russell Martin

OF Matt Holliday
Jason Bay
Jayson Werth
Raul Ibanez
Carlos Lee
Michael CUddyer

SP Zach Greinke
Cliff Lee
Josh Johnson
Jair Jurrjens
Ubaldo Jimenez
Tommy Hanson
Jorge de la Rosa
Ryan Dempster
Brett Anderson
Derek Lowe
Hiroki Kuroda
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Clay Buchholz
Homer Bailey
Phil Hughes
Marc Rzepczynski
Vicente Padilla

RP Mariano Rivera
Andrew Bailey

[Nomrom]

Being from Houston, I'm an Astros fan. So I'll probably just pretend this season doesn't happen. I am going to a game tomorrow though. It's the 45th anniversary of the opening of the Astrodome (Not sure why we still celebrate that, since we don't play there anymore.). And there is no better way to celebrate then by losing to the Phillies again.


Cardinals (http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/index.jsp?c_id=stl) and El Hombre (http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=405395) all the way.

I refuse to believe that man doesn't use steroids.

[skywalker]

Dodgers fan here. As for that chart above, I think the whole Dodgers/Angels placement is a little deceptive. Remember, no matter how much they want you to forget it, it is the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. The Dodgers do not share Los Angeles with them, although Southern California may be split fairly evenly.
Had my fantasy league draft the other day. Here's my stud line up, for those of you who are interested. Keep in mind though, wins and home runs are worth a ton whereas WHIP and stolen bases are worth almost nothing.
1B Ryan Howard
Kendry Morales

2B Dustin Pedroia
Ian Kinsler

SS Jimmy Rollins
Jason Bartlett

3B Evan Longoria
Casey Blake

C Joe Mauer
Russell Martin

OF Matt Holliday
Jason Bay
Jayson Werth
Raul Ibanez
Carlos Lee
Michael CUddyer

SP Zach Greinke
Cliff Lee
Josh Johnson
Jair Jurrjens
Ubaldo Jimenez
Tommy Hanson
Jorge de la Rosa
Ryan Dempster
Brett Anderson
Derek Lowe
Hiroki Kuroda
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Clay Buchholz
Homer Bailey
Phil Hughes
Marc Rzepczynski
Vicente Padilla

RP Mariano Rivera
Andrew Bailey

You seem to have invested quite heavily in the Braves' starting rotation. I know nothing of fantasy, all I can say is that our guys are likely to be great pitchers based on stats other than wins, given the number of games where the Braves either blow leads, never give run support, or start winning after relief pitching comes in. Our starting staff is very good, but are more likely to contribute in the stats that don't depend on the team around them.

Also, the Angels are contractually obligated to have Anaheim in the name. The new owner was dead set on making them the "Los Angeles Angels," but Anaheim found something in the contract to force them to stay the way they are. They are, however, intended to be an Angelo team.


Being from Houston, I'm an Astros fan. So I'll probably just pretend this season doesn't happen. I am going to a game tomorrow though. It's the 45th anniversary of the opening of the Astrodome (Not sure why we still celebrate that, since we don't play there anymore.). And there is no better way to celebrate then by losing to the Phillies again.

Team is still called the Astros? And that was a huge moment not only in franchise history, but in baseball history? Plus, the 45th anniversary of the Colt .45s becoming the Astros seems like a fitting thing to celebrate.


I refuse to believe that man doesn't use steroids.

And that is really the point. Pujols is the golden boy. If he gets even a whiff of steroids on him, it would be stunning. Ask anyone even remotely involved with the game, tho, "who would it surprise you most to find out they're on steroids?" They all say Pujols.

[Gaelbert]

Last year Tommy Hanson went 11-4 with a 2.89 ERA.
Derek Lowe was 15-10 with a 4.67 ERA.
And Jair Jurrjens was 14-10 with a 2.60.
Those are all good enough win loss records for me, although I do expect Derek Lowe's win loss to sink this year. Still, he was a late round draft pick, and Jurrjens and Hanson have some incredible numbers.
I'm also banking pretty heavily on the Rockies pitching staff. While that may seem like suicide, their ballpark was modified to be more reasonable, and they hae a couple of really good starters.

And like it or not, the Angels are physically located in Anaheim. They might pretend otherwise, but their fanbase is not going to pull a whole lot from Dodger's territory in Los Angeles.

[tcrudisi]

I do not watch games, with the exception of my preferred team being in the World Series, upon which I try to watch a game or two. In the 90's, that meant I watched quite a few games.

How are the Braves expected to do this year? From what I've read, we have an amazing rookie who should hit about 500 home runs a game, an incredible offense and pretty darn good pitching.

Yet we aren't favored to win our own division? I'm confused. What do I not know?

[PhoeKun]

How are the Braves expected to do this year? From what I've read, we have an amazing rookie who should hit about 500 home runs a game, an incredible offense and pretty darn good pitching.

Yet we aren't favored to win our own division? I'm confused. What do I not know?

The Phillies acquired Roy Halladay? In a nutshell, your division features the team that represented the NL in the world series two years running, and the general consensus is they haven't lost much in the way of potency.

And even if they have lost a step, you generally pick the defending champion over the improved contender until one or both gives you a reason not to. So there you have it.

[RabbitHoleLost]

RED SOX YAY.

...I lived in Massachusetts til I was twelve.
I don't actually like baseball, but cheering for the Red Sox is part of my breeding.

[tcrudisi]

The Phillies acquired Roy Halladay? In a nutshell, your division features the team that represented the NL in the world series two years running, and the general consensus is they haven't lost much in the way of potency.

And even if they have lost a step, you generally pick the defending champion over the improved contender until one or both gives you a reason not to. So there you have it.

I can understand that logic. The Braves represented the NL for how many years in a row? For several years, people kept picking against them and they kept doing it. I remember listening to one analyst say something like, "The last 3 years I've picked against them. Not any more. Until they finally lose, I'm going to pick them to win it."

Course, since then the Braves haven't been very good.

And the Phillies? Really? When in the heck did the Phillies become good? (No offense to Phillies fans, this is just news to me).

[skywalker]

How are the Braves expected to do this year? From what I've read, we have an amazing rookie who should hit about 500 home runs a game, an incredible offense and pretty darn good pitching.

Yet we aren't favored to win our own division? I'm confused. What do I not know?

Heyward is an amazing rookie (and of course everyone went triple ape shi!t when he hit a homer in his first at bat in the big leagues at home) but he is still a rookie. Whether or not he can produce on a day-to-day basis remains to be seen. He was only 2 for 5 on opening day, and since then he's 1 for 12, batting .176 (ouch), struck out 4 times last night (golden sombrero ouch), and his OPS is .634 (triple ouch). Now, I'm not ragging on him, he's a rookie. He will probably be great some day. But the people anointing him as the savior of this season are way premature. I just hope he doesn't turn out like Jordan Schafer (started opening day last year in center, then faded into the minors and never came back).

Our offense is not incredible. Heyward is a question in right. Nate McClouth is prone to lingering injuries in center. We have two left fielders, which means a great hitter named Matty Diaz (who should be getting 4 at-bats a day) has to split time in left. In my opinion, Cabrera has very little to offer over Diaz. His fielding isn't as good and neither is his hitting. But maybe he remembers what it feels like to win as a Yankee?

By contrast to the outfield (too many players) the infield has too few. Chipper Jones and Troy Glaus are old with a capital "O." Glaus also had a stinker of a season last year after being a "B" category hitter for most of his career. Can he recover? The main problem is keeping them off the DL. Chipper is already DTD. Who's his backup at 3rd? Why, our starting 2nd baseman (and so far the most impressive part of the lineup) Martin Prado. Who's the backup shortstop? Martin Prado. Who's the second backup 1st baseman? Martin Prado. So, we have an injury prone 3rd baseman whose backup is the starting 2nd baseman. Shortstops are good for 1-2 injuries a year baseline, and his backup is also the 2nd baseman. It takes exactly 3 injuries before the Braves infield goes from Jones, Escobar, Prado, Glaus to Infante, Prado, Conrad, Hinske. Those last two names are not names you want to see in the starting lineup. And those are not just possible injuries. They are somewhat likely to occur, potentially at the same time.

But the catchers, the catchers are decent enough, and...

Oh, that rotation.

Hudson, Hanson, Jurrjens is an incredible front end. No, it's not Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, but nothing ever will be again. The latter two are young, of course, but they're phenomenal. The real problem is the back end (Lowe and Kawakami) and yes Lowe is part of the back end despite being the opening day starter. It really hurt that the Braves couldn't trade Lowe and had to let Javy Vazquez go after a Cy Young season. The rotation, however, is still awesome, and the Braves seemingly have each guy playing one spot below where he would normally be playing. (IE, we have typical no.1/no.2 guys playing 3, and no.3 guy playing 4, etc.) The question mark is Kawakami, who spent parts of last season in the bullpen after the Braves wound up with 6 starters.

Is the rotation better than Philly's? I don't think so, this year. But it will be a good rotation for much longer than Philly's, which is aging at a rather rapid pace.

Now, the bullpen, that might push the Braves' staff past Philly. We have one of the greatest closers of his generation, and a pretty decent former closer setting him up. Peter Moylan is one of the better 7th inning guys in the league (hasn't allowed a homer since opening day '08!) and our lefty specialist and long relief are pretty alright too.

The Phillies, of course, have incredible starting pitching, a great offensive and defensive lineup, their only question is the bullpen. Brad Lidge had 41 saves in 41 opportunities in 2008. That's incredible. In 2009, he had 31 saves in 42. He blew 11 saves, which is far from elite. His ability to stay healthy and have a much better season is key to the Phillies having a good season in an NL East that is at least much improved, IMO.

tl;dr? I don't think this is the Braves' year. Maybe next year, or even the next, but it's also dependent on getting good infield replacements (for Jones and Glaus) and a decent, semi-long-term closer (Zombie Wagner pitches off of the mound of earth above his coffin).

The Phillies became good... About 2007? They've been decent for many years, perennially a thorn in the Braves' sides throughout the 90s, altho really it's almost always a weak division with the Nationals and either the Marlins or the Mets always sucking. But they've been really good about since they started winning the division on a regular basis, I'd say. So you haven't missed too much, it's not like they've been great for years.

[SensFan]

Re: NL East

The Phillies have two straight NL pennants, and haven't lost anyone of tremendous importance since last year. Oh, and they added the best pitcher in baseball by a considerable margin.

[tcrudisi]

everything

Wow. That summed it up rather nicely. Thanks! I will try to watch a couple of games this year when I get back to the US. Hopefully the Braves will be winning their division so I can feel like I'm cheering for a winner when I watch them. :smallcool:

Yeah, I'm okay with being a bandwagon fan -- I do it in every sport not called college basketball, but I'm from NC, what would you expect? haha Or I guess I'd be considered a bandwagon fan when I only have one team that I cheer for in every sport, but I usually only watch when they are winning. Actually, I cheer for one team and I cheer against one or two (Yankees and Red Sox, I'm looking at you... unless a salary cap is finally implemented, then I won't care).

And seriously, why can't baseball get a darn salary cap? As an economist, I'm against salary caps. As a fan -- I need them. I don't like the unfairness of having one team spend $250,000,000 a year while another is spending $40,000,000 (estimates, I don't remember the exact amounts). Seriously? I don't want to watch the sport of "which owner can spend the most money." I want to see two teams who spend the same amount of money go at it.

[PhoeKun]

Yeah, I'm okay with being a bandwagon fan -- I do it in every sport not called college basketball, but I'm from NC, what would you expect? haha Or I guess I'd be considered a bandwagon fan when I only have one team that I cheer for in every sport, but I usually only watch when they are winning. Actually, I cheer for one team and I cheer against one or two (Yankees and Red Sox, I'm looking at you... unless a salary cap is finally implemented, then I won't care).

The term for that is "fair weather fan". You have loyalties (usually tied to a region), but will only actually support the team when its a front runner. In off years, you disappear. A bandwagon fan would switch to the next front runner as soon as the last one fell out of favor.



And seriously, why can't baseball get a darn salary cap? As an economist, I'm against salary caps. As a fan -- I need them. I don't like the unfairness of having one team spend $250,000,000 a year while another is spending $40,000,000 (estimates, I don't remember the exact amounts). Seriously? I don't want to watch the sport of "which owner can spend the most money." I want to see two teams who spend the same amount of money go at it.

While I do enjoy parity, I'm a little tired of people complaining about the lack of salary cap as though it's some sort of iron shackle around the necks of poorer teams. Earlier in the thread I outlined the ways small-market teams can compete with the Yankees of the world, but lets explore this from the other side of the coin.

The Cubs spend inordinate amounts of money every year (I'm too lazy to go digging for figures right now, but I'm pretty sure they've outspent the Red Sox some years) and they can't even win their division every year. Or when they do, they're promptly brushed aside in the post season by a team with a much smaller payroll.

The Mets have a colossal payroll in excess of 50 million a year more than the average, and they've flat out sucked lately.

As for the Red Sox? If I'm not mistaken they're second in payroll (second only to... yeah, you know the answer already) at... $167 million, I think. But that number is in a vacuum. Break that down a bit.

-- Close to 30 million of that is tied up between Mike Lowell and Jason Varitek. Lowell is at the end of a contract offered on the basis of sentimentality, and this year isn't even the starting 1st baseman. And Varitek is a freaking corpse at this point. Completely ignoring his 2 homeruns tonight, since they only happened because the Royals don't understand that he can not hit a fastball if the lives of his family depend on it. And he's not a starter, either. This isn't exactly buying us a championship. Ortiz is a similar "no way he'd make that much money if he had a contract offered today" case, but we'll not talk about him because watching Papi hit anymore makes me sad.

-- Think about the stars of the Sox lineup. Youkilis is a product of the farm system, as is Pedroia. Victor Martinez is an excellent hitter, but not a "once-in-a-lifetime" kind of talent, and is generally considered a defensive liability (word on the street is that the coaching staff is fixing him on that, though). Jacoby Ellsbury is a quality lead off man with great speed and base stealing instincts, but he's home grown as well. And if you really expect me to believe that anybody not named Theo Epstein thinks JD Drew is worth $14 million a year, I'm going to die of laughter.

-- Who's left? Mike Cameron, an excellent defensive center fielder with a .250 career batting average (I don't think teams were beating down the door for him). Adrian Beltre, another high-caliber defensive guy whose offense I suspect will largely be the product of Fenway Park. And Scutaro is an above average shortstop in most respects while being flat-out excellent in none. This is a very easy lineup to emulate on a much smaller budget.

-- So is it pitching? Beckett is an elite pitcher, but when it comes time to name the very best, his name tends to fall off the list. Lester is phenomenal, but a product of drafting and farm teams, as is Bucholz (who is nowhere near as good as Lester, but eh). I adore Wakefield, but I don't think anyone really considers him a critical part of winning a championship. I would pay Daisuke Matsuazaka not to pitch at this point. Which leaves Lackey, who is really the acquisition I can really point to as the product of a high bankroll.

So where does the big money come in? Could you really accuse them of buying a title with that roster? Do you really think your team couldn't put together the same kind of lineup for 50-60 million less?

edit: for the record, I do think that a team able to spend more money has a competitive advantage over one that can't, but that advantage seems vastly overstated to me. Apparently the MLB is even batting around the idea of separating the Red Sox and the Yankees. This is ridiculous.

[SensFan]

While I agree with you completely, you have to realize that the advantage the Sox/Yanks/etc have is that they can afford to drag around the Lowells, Variteks, and Pappis of the world. Look at how much the Jays have been chained to Wells' contract in the last few years, and his is only something like 13million, if I recall.

Seperating the Yanks and Red Sox would be an awful idea. Under the current system, the Jays and Orioles don't have playoff hopes. If the Sox/Yanks are separated, then 8 teams (2 divisions minus them) will be relegated to playing for Wild Card.

[skywalker]

As for the Red Sox? If I'm not mistaken they're second in payroll (second only to... yeah, you know the answer already) at... $167 million, I think. But that number is in a vacuum. Break that down a bit.

They are actually 4th this year, behind the Yanks, Cubs, and Mets.


-- Close to 30 million of that is tied up between Mike Lowell and Jason Varitek. Lowell is at the end of a contract offered on the basis of sentimentality, and this year isn't even the starting 1st baseman. And Varitek is a freaking corpse at this point. Completely ignoring his 2 homeruns tonight, since they only happened because the Royals don't understand that he can not hit a fastball if the lives of his family depend on it. And he's not a starter, either. This isn't exactly buying us a championship. Ortiz is a similar "no way he'd make that much money if he had a contract offered today" case, but we'll not talk about him because watching Papi hit anymore makes me sad.

The last Red Sox Championship was in 2007. So let's look more at 2007, shall we? In 2007, the Sox had a payroll around $143 million, which I'm pretty sure was good for second that year.

Lowell hit .324 with 120 RBIs. His OPS was .879 and his slugging was .501. Granted, that's the best year he's ever had, but it wasn't exactly an extreme outlier, either.

The same year, Ortiz hit .332 with 35 homers and 117 RBIs.

I will grant that Varitek did not contribute much in the way of offense, tho.


-- Think about the stars of the Sox lineup. Youkilis is a product of the farm system, as is Pedroia. Victor Martinez is an excellent hitter, but not a "once-in-a-lifetime" kind of talent, and is generally considered a defensive liability (word on the street is that the coaching staff is fixing him on that, though). Jacoby Ellsbury is a quality lead off man with great speed and base stealing instincts, but he's home grown as well. And if you really expect me to believe that anybody not named Theo Epstein thinks JD Drew is worth $14 million a year, I'm going to die of laughter.

Those guys may be homegrown, but as we discussed before, the Sox have the ability to keep them all around. A small market team, by contrast, has to deal with having enough money to be another farm team, virtually. They can't afford to keep that many farm prospects around.


-- Who's left? Mike Cameron, an excellent defensive center fielder with a .250 career batting average (I don't think teams were beating down the door for him). Adrian Beltre, another high-caliber defensive guy whose offense I suspect will largely be the product of Fenway Park. And Scutaro is an above average shortstop in most respects while being flat-out excellent in none. This is a very easy lineup to emulate on a much smaller budget.

Keep in mind the Red Sox are supposedly subscribing to a more defensive, slightly less spendy "smaller ball" approach this year.


-- So is it pitching? Beckett is an elite pitcher, but when it comes time to name the very best, his name tends to fall off the list. Lester is phenomenal, but a product of drafting and farm teams, as is Bucholz (who is nowhere near as good as Lester, but eh). I adore Wakefield, but I don't think anyone really considers him a critical part of winning a championship. I would pay Daisuke Matsuazaka not to pitch at this point. Which leaves Lackey, who is really the acquisition I can really point to as the product of a high bankroll.

Just because Beckett doesn't get named among the very best doesn't mean you didn't buy a championship with him. He's an elite pitcher and you're paying him $10 million a year. Sounds like buying talent to me, regardless of whether anybody pays attention. I certainly do. You seem to have forgotten what you're arguing here because while this is a really good argument for the Red Sox pitching not being that great, it's not a great argument against them buying talent (and championships). Dice-K is a disappointment, but you can't win them all.

Also, I think you might not be giving a couple of these guys enough credit due to being a fan of the team. Dice-K is probably a lot more disappointing to you than to me. Objectively, he hasn't been terrible. Certainly disappointing, but he's only 29, plenty of time to work it out, still.


So where does the big money come in? Could you really accuse them of buying a title with that roster? Do you really think your team couldn't put together the same kind of lineup for 50-60 million less?

Not the '07 lineup, no. And it doesn't matter whether you could put together the same kind of lineup for 50-60 less, they didn't. Which in some ways means they bought a championship.

BUT! I don't agree with the idea of a salary cap. It's simple economics. The best players should get paid whatever they can get and I think in any professional setting, it's natural that a person with more money can hire better people. Let's face it, the product is better without a cap. The Yankees are the most popular sports team in the world.