Commissioner For a Day
(Inspired by baseballgirl's post from Wednesday, these five ideas all probably require collective bargaining, but I’m assuming absolute power in this hypothetical):
1. Allow the trading of draft picks and institute “hard” draft pick slotting (NBA style), which would instantly ensure that the projected best talent is always taken in the first round as it should, and as it is in every other sport with a draft. Slotting and trading of picks go hand-in-hand, because if you’re going to tell the team drafting No. 1 that they HAVE to pay the top player an $8.5MM signing bonus, it’s only fair to allow them to trade out of that position if they think they can find better value in a lower slot.
Obviously the specific slot figures would be written into the CBA and would increase each year with inflation and with the continued health of the game, just as FA prices do. In addition to the obvious benefits, it would mean that players would simply sign their deals immediately (since there’s no dollar figure to negotiate) and get a few extra months of minor league development instead of holding out and not playing until the following spring.
I have a wild hunch this could become a hot-button topic after the ‘09 draft. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Strasburg demand $15-20 million if he has a healthy, dominant junior season. If he falls past No. 1, and someone ends up paying that figure, that might create enough animosity in the Player’s Union and among small-market owners that they’d actually agree to bargain the issue of “hard slotting” draft picks. And draft pick trading is a logical short step from there, because it gives owners the ability to manage their money/bonuses as they choose.
This would also spice up the trading deadline each year, as each team in the hunt would have additional trading chits if they wished to go for broke down the stretch. Just like the NFL and NBA's draft-pick trading rules, MLB would need to mandate that draft picks too far into the future couldn't be traded, so that overzealous GMs wouldn't mortgage the future of the franchise to save their own jobs in the short term. (e.g., allow draft pick trading for a maximum of 2-3 years into the future).
2. Include International players in the Rule 4 (North American amateur) June draft. There’s certainly enough intelligence and resources league-wide to make this a possibility now, even if there wasn’t a few decades back. It might also help make all 50 rounds of the draft relevant for every team. More importantly, it would help to remove some of the ethical concerns associated with agents/buscones, bonus-skimming, and broken promises that currently give a black eye to the International scene. Critics say this would “ruin” baseball in Venezuela and the Dominican Republic; I highly doubt that two incredibly passionate baseball countries would simply quit playing over this. But would the International players have to 18 to be eligible for the modified draft, or only 16?
3. Completely revise the archaic ELIAS player ranking system and the FA compensation system. I’m pretty sure they’ll do something with this in the next CBA (2011). It’s a good idea to compensate teams for lost free agents; it’s a really bad idea to use things like fielding percentage and batting average as key determinants for that compensation. It creates crazy inequities like this, where Juan Uribe is worthy of compensation, but Jason Giambi isn't.
4. Eliminate ALL playoff off-days.
You can’t really eliminate regular season off-days, because you need buffers for rainouts, and you occasionally need an off day/travel day for the quality of play to remain high and for players to remain sane.
But no one should have trouble getting up adrenaline for three weeks of playoffs.
What if teams had to actually use their 25-man roster in the playoffs? That’s what got them there, isn’t it? This also helps allieviate the rainout problem. The season could still still start practically rain-free on April 6 and be comfortably done before Halloween if there were no scheduled playoff off-days.
Allow 5 days for the division series, 7 days for the LCS, and 7 for the World Series = 19 days total.
You want a day or two off? Kick your opponent’s butt quickly.
In addition to reducing the likelihood of rain, this might actually improve the quality of play, by reducing the awkwardly long stretches of time between some pitchers' outings.
Let’s look at how this would play out in in the ’09 season, when the season begins on April 5th and ends on Sunday, October 4th.
*Allow Monday for Game 163/one-game playoffs that decide the race.
*The Divisional Series each start on Tuesday, Oct. 6th. Eighteen days later, Game 7 of the World Series would be played on October 24th, with perhaps no rain at all.
Sure, there would be four playoff games every day for the entire first week of the playoffs. Isn’t that kind of awesome though? The NCAA seems to think so each March, and so do thousands of people who skip work on the first Thursday and Friday of March Madness, and millions who watch their productivity plummet as they watch the NCAA Tourney on the office TV.
In fact, here’s a revenue-generating olive branch in the direction of those networks who lost ratings by playing daytime playoff games:
You could make the Division Series a best-of-seven in this proposal, and the World Series Game 7 would still end by October 26th, the 21st day of the postseason. Exactly three weeks of playoffs. That’s a few extra games of revenue for the stations to compensate for inferior time slots in the morning, as the station tries to fit in four playoff games in a day.
Or, the league could treat the Division Series the way CBS treats Day 1 and 2 of March Madness – play two playoff games simultaneously, and the network can pop back and forth, covering the most interesting one. During blowouts, rainouts, and pitching changes, there’s still some relevant action to switch over to. With four daily games, two of them could start at 5:30 and two of them could start at 8:30 Eastern., kind of like Sunday NFL coverage.
5. Steal from David Pinto and Tom Tango.
From Pinto:
"I really think we should get rid of the NL and AL. Divide the teams into five six-team divisions. Each division plays 90 games in division, and 72 games against two other divisions on a rotating basis. Five division champions, three wild cards. Rank all division champs ahead of the wild cards, and rank the team 1-8 based on winning percentage. One plays eight, two plays seven, etc. in the first round. Second round, re-rank the teams, wild cards always last. One plays four, etc. The two winners play for the championship."
And after eliminating the AL/NL distinction, this from Tango:
For every major league game, allow the home team's manager to determine whether the DH will be used or not.
What do you think?
0 recs |
68 comments
|
Comments
If you start allowing for trading draft picks I'd suggest the following:
- Move the draft to Aug 1st.
- Add that no draft slot can be traded for money alone
- Add that a draft slot trade must contain someone on the current major league roster in exchange of the pick
It would heat up the trade deadline even more as teams figure out the combination of how to win now and how to use the draft to their advantage. It also may reduce teams like the yankees & red sox from trading up in the draft since they’d have to give up an element of their current team to get that pick. It would also benefit small market teams who are giving up the marque player at the deadline, they get a couple of high quality prospects and the first couple of draft picks of that team in that year’s draft (i.e. immediate returns and they can estimate the benefits of the picks since they can have an idea who would be available in the first round).
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
by DMOAS on Oct 31, 2008 12:53 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I wish I could stay to really argue this but I can't
Forget the part about the international draft. The idea is great in concept but it needs more thinking before it becomes practical.
Here’s maybe the biggest hole: Why should some 16 year old Venezuelan kid have a chance at being drafted in the 1st round while a 16 year old from LA can’t even petition to be drafted?
The monster at the end of this blog.
by grover on Oct 31, 2008 5:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Because we can’t be bothered to even pretend to give two sh*ts about whether or not kids from other countries go to school, whereas with respect to wholesome American youngsters we prefer to preserve the righteous and comfy mythology of “education first”?
Or maybe it’s because those Venezuelan kids are actually 22 most of the time. Hard to say.
by 74mk on Oct 31, 2008 8:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Raise the IFA age to 18
Problem solved.
(Yes, I’m aware this would reduce the number of international players in the game, but I think the social costs of all the guys who bust out far outweigh the minimal impact on MLB’s own perceived diversity.)
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Oct 31, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see how that would reduce the number of international players
It’s not like the 16 year olds that get signed come right over and start playing in MLB anyway.
by mikev on Oct 31, 2008 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And if there's concern
MLB could probably collectively operate an international league and invite all the 15-18 years olds who would normally be drafted (and more who wouldn’t) to come play in it for free. Ease of scouting them all, solid prep for being introduced to minor league play, limiting their use (i.e. pitch counts), etc.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
by DMOAS on Oct 31, 2008 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe a separate draft for foreign players?
Just thinking out loud.
"If I've got baggage, he's got a whole set of Louis Vuitton." ~ Milton Bradley on Barry Bonds
by UncleLeo on Oct 31, 2008 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I kind of like the AL/NL
but think it’s made pointless due to the interleague play. That said, the DH rule should be the same in both leagues.
by NateHST on Oct 31, 2008 6:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The season should be shortened by 20 games
And it should start closer to mid-way through April and end mid-way through September so you aren’t dealing with as many weather issues, particularly on the West Coast. It would also allow for more off-days during the season which would hopefully lead to players being healthier over the long haul.
I know it will never happen because owners would NEVER sacrifice extra revenue, but I think it would be smarter for baseball. That way you are ending the World Series closer to the middle of October rather than November.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Oct 31, 2008 8:06 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm with Kieth Law on this one
You wouldn’t be saying that except for this year’s game 5. This year’s game 5 was so shocking because rain issues during the world series never happen (and wouldn’t if – say – the Dodgers made the series this year).
Lets not solve a “problem” that has happened once in my lifetime, especially not by shortening the season.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Oct 31, 2008 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well it's also an issue at the beginning of the season
How many games seem to be rained on or postponed at the beginning of the year? I would guess a lot, especially on the East Coast. And those games are usually some of the least attended any way outside of opening day.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Oct 31, 2008 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a fairer point
Especially since I attended the A’s / White Sox opener last season and it was 22 degrees with flurries.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Oct 31, 2008 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I’m with you and Keith. There have been too many overreactions to one game being delayed by rain. In fact, I’m glad we now have a precedent because I would have hated to have had the series end on an “official game” of less than nine innings.
I would be in favor of shortening the season to 160 games if it meant making the divisional series seven games.
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Oct 31, 2008 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would it be smarter?
How does shortening the season by 20 games help MLB? For all the hoo ha over the weather issues, do they really affect MLB negatively? How does ending the season closer to mid October rather than November benefit MLB?
As for player injuries, that I lean towards agreeing on. But if a player is overworked to the point of possible injury, his team should know that managing his workload carefully is important, and not just continue flogging him.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Oct 31, 2008 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think shortening the season would also help
make the divisional races a lot more interesting. I’ve talked to many a casual fan who thinks that there are waaaaaay too many games in MLB because there is one every day. To them they said it feels a lot more meaningless and maybe the division races are closer at 142 instead of 162.
by Tyler Bleszinski on Oct 31, 2008 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm...
On the one hand, I don’t care what the “casual fan” wants. On the other hand, I know they far outnumber the hardcore fans and pay more of the costs.
"If I've got baggage, he's got a whole set of Louis Vuitton." ~ Milton Bradley on Barry Bonds
by UncleLeo on Oct 31, 2008 8:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eh, I dunno.
If you’re looking at it from the perspective of a casual fan who believes that there are too many games, 142 games is still a lot of games.
Baseball will never be like the NFL, with the games all being major weekend drink and eat and party events.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Oct 31, 2008 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Less baseball?
Naw…Let the fans brave the cold. I enjoy watching anytime of the year…just not always in person when it is freezing.
by IM4Oakgal on Nov 1, 2008 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
eliminate postseason travel days 100% agree
by OaklandSi on Oct 31, 2008 8:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
But what will ESPN talk about with no off-days?
Oh.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Oct 31, 2008 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly, I think a lot of these ideas are pretty silly
Trading draft picks doesn’t make much sense in baseball. And it would only further hurt the teams who aren’t any good when they’re trading established players for – not prospects, who at least have some pro experience – but a draft slot. Teams often can’t accurately analyze known commodities. I doubt they know the value of a pick. I don’t see how this makes things better. “Spicing up” is not a good enough reason. On the other hand, I think every league should do a hard slot for draft picks. I think the league should mandate years/dollars, but the teams and players/agents can figure out the breakdown.
Too many logistical problems with amateur players in the draft, namely the age rules and the unreliability of player information. There are still players who have age/name problems and it’s one thing when the guy is signed and the team loses nothing. It’s another when they’re using a draft pick. Ideally, yes, this would be better. I just don’t think it would work yet. I think the possibility of two separate drafts might work better.
YES YES YES. The Elias thing is not just clearly broken, it’s also secret. I love the idea of FA compensation, but it’s clearly based on stats that don’t matter a whole lot.
I don’t agree with eliminating all off days for individual series. I do think they can squeeze things together a little bit more. There were 2 or 3 days between the LCS and World Series. Why? Why do the Angels play a game, have an off day, then play another game? (The answer is so two games aren’t on at once, but that’s a silly reason). Plus, travel often requires off days. You’re telling me a Mariners/Marlins World Series wouldn’t need off days?
Don’t like either Pinto’s or Tango’s ideas, but I do think the NL should be forced to join the 21st century and adopt the DH.
by thejd44 on Oct 31, 2008 9:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Almost exactly my reaction
Although I like the ability to trade draft picks (plus hard slotting and no cash in the transaction). I guess I don’t really see why not, and if two teams think a trade is beneficial why not let them make it.
Otherwise spot on.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Oct 31, 2008 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why should the NL be forced to adopt the DH?
Fans of NL teams don’t seem to have a problem with no DH, just as fans of AL teams don’t seem to have a problem with a DH.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Oct 31, 2008 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
In fact, I think teams in both leagues should use their own DH/non-DH rules in any interleague, All-Star, and World Series games. No alternating crap. AL uses DH, NL does not.
You chooses your rules, you lives and dies by your choices.
"If I've got baggage, he's got a whole set of Louis Vuitton." ~ Milton Bradley on Barry Bonds
by UncleLeo on Oct 31, 2008 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm, I like that.
ZIPS: Milledge: 466 HR, 485 2B, 2282 hits, 278-379-524
by rfloh on Oct 31, 2008 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
my two imperial ukases
1. No artificial turf, ever, anywhere
2. Mandatory FREE KRAUT at all stadia in perpetuity
Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Oct 31, 2008 9:35 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
My imperial ukase
No resurrecting archaic plural forms just because an ordinary word happens to be spelled the same as the Latin word to which it is distantly related.
This pernicious trend must be stopped, or else we’ll soon be reading about circi, asyli, podii, etc.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Nov 1, 2008 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Christ, what a couple of recta
Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Nov 3, 2008 1:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The things I want to change
1. $500 penalty every time someone does their #$%@#$^ Nomar impression fiddling with their batting gloves between every single pitch. Alternatively, if you adjust them twice in an at bat you have to take them off. This might be silly, but it pisses me off to no end.
2. Either eliminate errors as a stat, or hire professionals in a centralized office to monitor feeds and make the call. The reason fielding percentages are historically high is that whatever idiot at the stadium is in charge refuses to ever call them.
3. When the defense attempts to turn a double play, the runner is safe at second unless a player both has the ball and is touching second before the runner gets there. The whole “he was near the base around the time he caught the ball” thing is insane.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Oct 31, 2008 9:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
#3 - It's like the ball over the goal-line in football
GET IN THE END ZONE.
What is this, horseshoes?
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Oct 31, 2008 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
rule change
Whenever there is a runner on first and fewer than 2 outs, the ball shall be replaced with a live hand grenade prior to each pitch being thrown.
(This will also have the beneficial side effect of speeding up pitchers’ deliveries.)
Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Oct 31, 2008 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and one for the fans, courtesy of Carlin:
Never mind bringing a glove to a game. Bring a bat! When a foul ball comes flying toward you, BAM! Hit it back to the players. Everyone will sense you’re a fun fan. They’ll be glad they came to the game on straitjacket night.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Oct 31, 2008 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
another Carlin-ism...
…pitchers hits the batter… batter’s out!
Two good accurate pitchers and you got two perfect games.
(It’s a joke, yes, we all know the game couldn’t end in a tie that way, but unfortunately some people will have to be told it’s a joke)
"If I've got baggage, he's got a whole set of Louis Vuitton." ~ Milton Bradley on Barry Bonds
by UncleLeo on Oct 31, 2008 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's crazy
You can’t end a game that….
never mind.
P.S. You’re right.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on Oct 31, 2008 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
These are some interesting ideas,
however the proposition of eliminating off-days is totally absurd. They need these travel days for the teams to “travel”, I know it is a pretty complicated subject. The media needs time to travel and this is also another big reason that these days are present.
by mattman on Oct 31, 2008 10:04 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...
I know it is a pretty complicated subject.
Indeed. It appears to be too complicated for some to grasp.
During the year, every team has at least one trip in which they play back-to-back games in a different location than they played in just the day before.
Although I gotta tell ya, the combo of ignorance and condescent in that post above is an impressive double-whammy!
"Some of the men didn't wait for the women and children to jump off the sinking ship that is our season." - 67MARQUEZ
by notsellingjeans on Oct 31, 2008 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Travel Days,
give the MLB, the opportunity to make more money and get more exposure, why would they want to lessen these factors? That is all I am trying to point out.
by mattman on Oct 31, 2008 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's 5-7 games, max...
…and they’ll get time off between each series.
"If I've got baggage, he's got a whole set of Louis Vuitton." ~ Milton Bradley on Barry Bonds
by UncleLeo on Oct 31, 2008 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
27 x 6 = 162
Contract two teams. Divide 28-team league into four divisions. Every team plays every other team six times, three at home and three on the road. Top four teams go to the playoffs, 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3.
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Oct 31, 2008 10:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
You had me all the way up until the Tango thing
Of all the ideas you have my favorite is the one stolen from Pinto. Especially if the divisions are created based on geography. I think that a Pacific Division made up of The A’s, Dodgers, Giants, Angels, Padres and Mariners would be a very cool development :)
The biggest change I would make is to create a uniform schedule on Saturdays and partner with the networks who carry baseball to have something similar to NFL Sundays. All games west of the Mississippi start at 1:05 Pacific, all games east at 10:00 Pacific.
The broadcasters for the game could be the home teams crew. It is my favorite aspect of XM Radio and I think it would play well to a larger audience.
This would allow TBS and Fox to broadcast the games most relevant to the playoff picture, or to the current national story, etc. Hopefully it would allow the league to get off the Red Sox and Yankees bus a bit and build stronger regional followings for teams.
I think the key to improving ratings, and thus potential revenue, for the World Series is to make baseball about the game and all 30 teams, not about 2.
by jeffro on Oct 31, 2008 10:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
body armor
if you are hit by a pitch and the ball hits the body armor, it’s a ball rather than a free base
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Oct 31, 2008 10:26 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
a batting helmet "armors" a part of the body
Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are. @('.')@
by monkeyball on Oct 31, 2008 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
helmets and cups excluded
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Oct 31, 2008 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually do kind of like this idea
Both because there’s no harm in getting hit on your robo-arm and because it would let pitchers throw inside a bit more often.
"There's never enough time to do all the nothing you want" -Bill Watterson
by nevermoor on Oct 31, 2008 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
as monkeyball points out
I should have specified elbow pads.
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Oct 31, 2008 10:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think foul ball rather than ball
But I agree with the basic idea.
"That's not a Sherman tank, it's Frank Thomas!" - Monkeyball
by JLeverenz on Oct 31, 2008 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That would actually encourage throwing at players...
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Oct 31, 2008 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think it would encourage it much, if at all
If a pitcher can locate a pitch enough to hit an elbow pad, they should be able to throw it to a part of the strike zone the batter can’t handle and get a strike or a conventional foul ball. If you miss the spot over the plate then at worst it’s a ball. If you miss the armor it’s a ball at best and a HBP at worst.
"That's not a Sherman tank, it's Frank Thomas!" - Monkeyball
by JLeverenz on Oct 31, 2008 5:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The only way it should be a foul ball or strike
is if it’s in the zone when it hits him or he’s swing at the time. Even with the protection it’ll still hurt, and yes, pitchers, especially those who are looking for retaliation would absolutely throw at it and it would encourage them to go after that guy in the lineup since not only do they get to hit him, but it’s an advantage to hit him.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
by DMOAS on Oct 31, 2008 5:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really don't think it's that easy to hit the armor intentionally
All the batter has to do is lift his arm up a little or turn his body and the ball hits a non-armored part of his body and it’s a HBP. Not to mention that once a pitcher tries this once or twice he’s going to get a warning.
"That's not a Sherman tank, it's Frank Thomas!" - Monkeyball
by JLeverenz on Nov 1, 2008 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a better idea:
Instead of letting pitchers get away with this several times, why not NOT let them get away with it by ruling that a pitch that hits a batter is a “hit by pitch”?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Nov 1, 2008 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
the idea is to discourage the use of the armor
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Nov 2, 2008 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Egomaniac that I am, I still prefer my own 160-game idea
Based on 14 teams (can be adapted to 16 team league too).
In a 14-team league, each team plays the other thirteen teams 10 times (13×10=130). At the end of the 130 game season, in August, a new season begins. The top six teams are then scheduled for September to exclusively play each other. The bottom eight teams only play each other to reach 160 games total. The team with the best record after the next thirty games (3 home, 3 away versus the other five teams) goes to the World Series. No playoffs, except for a tie-breaker after 30 games. No ALDS, ALCS,AL-BS. A traditional World Series in October, like it used to be. October=World Series games….only!!!
In the current system, you have a maximum of ten ALDS games, a minimum of six, and a maximum of seven, with a minimum of four, ALCS games. With a September schedule with six teams, you have a potential of an entire month of “playoff”-like excitement , at minimum fifteen games where the teams begin to separate the likely top spot from the runners-up. It makes many games in August more likely to draw bigger crowds, while football is still not on TV (much). It also allows the “not this year” eight teams to try out September call-ups against other similar teams and not worry about putting their finest product on field in order to not influence “home field advantage in the playoffs” possibilities.
Baseball is not anything like hockey or basketball. Baseball should not attempt to emulate or copy the playoff style of those sports IMO. MLB should do something that sets them apart from “playoffs”. The all-time low ratings with the 2008 World Series indicates that baseball does not compete when played when the NHL, NBA, NFL, and collegiate football are also onscreen, on schedule. And it really does not compete when playoffs preceding the World Series goes on and on and on and on for 15-17 days.
Officially awaiting the 2009 season.
by One won lost won on Oct 31, 2008 11:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like this a lot
but I don’t see MLB clipping half of it’s teams, for obviou$ rea$on$. Maybe this can be incorporated into what they do in the English Premier League (wait, is it the EPL?) where the league is divided into two divisions, and the top half of the teams from the previous year play in the upper division, bottom half in the lower division. Teams are reslotted every year based on the previous year’s record. So while you wouldn’t have scenarios like Tampa Bay or the 2005 Marlins in the Series.
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Oct 31, 2008 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Remember, there is still 130 games until August 31st
where all teams are equal. No “divisions”. So you are not really “clipping” half the teams….all teams are still in the running until August 31st. After all, someone could “surge” from 8th to 6th, and get into the playoff group. Being 6th is a lot more feasible than attempting to be 4th, no matter where you sit in the race on July 31st. In the English system, if you are not in the upper division, all you play for is admittance to the upper division, for the entire year. No “worst to first” like the Tampa Bay D-Rays for English lower division teams.
Instead of a maximum of a combined seventeen “playoff” games possibly played between all four ALDS/ALCS teams, combined, you have Ninety games with World Series implications. Ninety. That $hould take care of the $ implication$.
Sure some years, one team will trounce even the other five teams in the Super September so thoroughly, that by halfway through the month, the winner is pretty apparent. But that will be rare.
After 130 games, the “final six” will be very well equipped teams.
What is critically wrong with the current system is the darn “Division Series”. The Athletics have been among the more “wronged”, fielding teams that were better than the team that eliminated them, and the whole series fell to either a bizarre play, or an injury (Dye). I thought this year, a bad inning for the Cubs turned worse because everyone knows the whole series can be won or lost on ONE play. That is simply absurd for a playoff. Let the World Series have the Maz home run, or the Buckner error….but not the playoffs! Game One! (Dodgers vs. Cubs). Derek Lee made one error, a bad one, but it was so bad, the momentum of it could not be reversed. In basketball, you make a bonehead play, the other team scores three points max (sans foul shot), and your team gets to go on offense. Football, a touchdown by your opponent, then you get the ball (onside kick assumed for the receiving team). In baseball, bad defense leaves your opponent with the ability to score, score, and score more! Psychologically, very damaging to the team. IMO this is why “playoff rounds” are such a “crapshoot” (attributed: B Beane). The psychological damage of a miscue is too severe. Especially for a five-game series.
Do this exercise: write out six teams that make the hypothetical “select six” in 2009. Then do the 30 days in September, with the three games per day, for the six teams playing each other. You really get a sense of intense interest in the outcomes of ALL six teams. Sweeps of a three game set…fantastic, but not fatal for the other team, but high emotions. Thirty intense days in September, non-stop, where the best HAVE to beat, the best, no let up. The World Series would almost be anti-climactic.
The Athletics made it to the playoffs in 2006 solely because of one team: Seattle. The A’s beat Seattle 17 out of 19 games! With a balanced schedule, the ineptitude of ONE team in ONE division would not put you in the World Series. But for Detroit, that was all the difference between the A’s and a lot of .500 teams.
Playoff rounds are simply not good baseball in my opinion.
Officially awaiting the 2009 season.
by One won lost won on Oct 31, 2008 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'll give it a shot
HARD Salary cap and/OR Revenue sharing that make the inequities that bring us the Bankees, Mets and Red Sux disappear. I know it’ll never happen, but hey – if I’m the commish, then all teams are gonna play on level terms.
Eliminate Umpire concocted stricke zones. Use the technical equipment that is available. Fox showed in the WS Moyer pitched that he would be effective if the ump gave him an extra 3 inches on one side of the plate and another inch on the other side.
This drives me crazy!
by plrraz on Oct 31, 2008 11:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the strike zone comment
Put a buzzer in the ump’s pocket. If it buzzes, call a strike. Otherwise, check-swing, HBP, all that can retain the “human element”.
Why not take advantage of technology on such a critical issue? Stop all the “strike three pouting”, whether on the mound or walking away from the batter’s box.
Officially awaiting the 2009 season.
by One won lost won on Oct 31, 2008 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
we can instantly see pitches on the internet, why can’t that technology be used in the game as well?
"This is Rickey, calling on behalf of Rickey."
by scatterbrian on Oct 31, 2008 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Robot umps FTW?
The Dirty Canuck of the now.
by Blicks on Oct 31, 2008 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Livan Hernandez and the 97 Marlins think you're crazy!
Bring back Hammer.
by OaktownPower on Oct 31, 2008 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Initial thoughts...
Allow draft trades… I could go for that, but I’d maybe still make teams keep their first round picks, but be allowed to trade all the others away if they’re that stupid.
No playoff off days: Totally agree, but it’s for the benefit of the networks, not the fans or the players or even the game.
"If I've got baggage, he's got a whole set of Louis Vuitton." ~ Milton Bradley on Barry Bonds
by UncleLeo on Oct 31, 2008 11:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
some good, some not so much
I like 1-3 on principle, though they might need some details worked out/added as others have suggested elsewhere.
I think you could eliminate the days off within a series with no problem, but keep 1 day off in between the end of one series and the beginning of another. This would allow for swifter completion while still giving a day off at the beginning of each new series for everyone to have some time to prognosticate, analyze, etc.
I strongly dislike the elimination of the AL/NL leagues, though I do think something can be done to make interleague schedules a bit more uniform for everybody. Also, keep the DH rule the way it is; I rather enjoy the distinction between the two leagues. I do like the idea that many have suggested that during interleague play the AL parks don’t use a DH and the NL parks do just to give the fans something new.
"That's not a Sherman tank, it's Frank Thomas!" - Monkeyball
by JLeverenz on Oct 31, 2008 12:14 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Eliminating all off days is probably a bit much
but there are way too many the way it is now. It’s ridiculous that it’s possible to use a 3 man rotation in the playoffs, when every team uses 5 in the long regular season.
From reading tango’s blog for awhile, I think I’ve disagreed with roughly 100% of the dozens of rule changes he’s proposed…
The A's colors are green and gold.
by mikeA on Oct 31, 2008 12:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
How about a day off only after game 5
and between series? This forces teams to use all 5 starters (or bring one back on short rest), gives a break between what could/would be the biggest games of the series and allow for some last minute juggling with the pitching staff to have your top 2/3 starters in the mix for the final two games. If teams can go on 15-20 game road trips without days off, they can survive one trip (even if it’s an east coast trip) during the playoffs and you can make that game 2 a day game and game 3 a night game in cases where it would be a cross country trip. You shouldn’t be able to win it all while only using 18/20 players on your roster, you should have to use 23/25.
In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!
by DMOAS on Oct 31, 2008 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree with 1,2,3. However, 4,5 are completely insane
Re 4: Have you ever flown for more than two hours and then tried to do something physical the same day? I’m guessing no.
Re 5: Hockey/Basketball playoffs allow way too many marginal teams into the playoffs. The current wild-card system has made the end of the season interesting for many years and the teams that get there have generally earned it. The NL west could be called an exception to this, except that they have fared well in the playoffs.
by williadc on Oct 31, 2008 4:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 






















