Showing posts with label Baseball. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Baseball. Show all posts
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Baseball Economics Expert Billy Beane: The Man Behind Moneyball
Simon Kuper
Monday 09/26/2011
http://www.maxim.com/amg/SPORTS/Articles/Baseball+Economics+Expert+Billy+Beane:+The+Man+Behind+Moneyball
Share What’s life like today for Billy Beane, the man who revolutionized baseball as a GM in the ’90s? For one thing, he’s adjusting to being portrayed by Brad Pitt in the film version of Moneyball. For another, he’s quietly overhauling the world’s most popular sport. Soccer, get ready to be Beane'd!
At ?rst you think it’s the junk room, a cellar where they dump old, broken things. But gradually it dawns on you: This really is the Oakland A’s clubhouse. Billy Beane, the A’s general manager, is sprawled on a battered sofa, his giant feet on the grubby beige carpet. The Oakland Coliseum has barely changed since 1981, when my dad drove me, a rabid 11-year-old A’s fan, up from Palo Alto to see the A’s beat the Red Sox 4-3 on a Dwayne Murphy homer. It must now be the most dilapidated stadium in the major leagues.
In this very room not long ago, Beane and Brad Pitt sat eating takeout pizza from Zachary’s in Berkeley. Pitt was hanging around, preparing to play Beane in the movie Moneyball, and as the GM explains, “He’s not the kind of guy who can just walk down to the local restaurant.” Pitt also sneaked a visit to Beane’s house, in the hills near Oakland. “I didn’t think it was a big deal,” Beane says, “but my wife and the nanny seemed to think it was. They were up at ?ve in the morning getting ready, which is the ?rst time my wife’s got up at ?ve in the morning.”
Beane spends a lot of time sitting in this room watching European soccer on the big television. While he watches, the A’s players watch him. Beane remembers sitting on his battered sofa last year when Arjen Robben of Bayerne Munich volleyed in the shot that knocked Manchester United out of the Champions League. Beane, nearly 50 now, jumped into the air and whooped. An A’s player looked up and laughed. What an absurd sight. You didn’t often see Beane whooping when his own team won a ball game.
“Just watch that goal,” Beane instructed the player, and because Beane is the boss and 6'4" and still sports the Charles Atlas physique that once lured half the baseball and football scouts in the U.S. to his parents’ house in San Diego, the A’s player watched the replay. And the second replay. Finally he got it: That skinny, bald little European was as great an athlete as the A’s player himself. “Wow,” said the A’s player, though maybe he said it only to please the boss.
Like millions of other Americans, Beane has come to follow soccer with the almost unhealthy fervor of a convert.
“I watch as many of the games as I can,” he admits. “I’m a bit of a junkie.”
And he’s also a soccer revolutionary. Five thousand miles from Europe, almost unseen by the media, Beane in?uences the thinking of soccer powerhouses like Chelsea and Manchester City. He regards Arsenal’s French manager, Arsène Wenger, as a soul mate, and you could even call him the brains behind Liverpool, the English club Red Sox owner John Henry bought last fall. Beane and his followers are now changing soccer—just as he previously changed baseball.
Sometime in late 2009, Beane and I began phoning and e-mailing each other to chat about soccer. I ?rst met him in real life in October 2010, and he turned out to be an unusual mix: an amiable Californian with big eyes behind his round glasses, and at the same time a bone-hard American businessman. I found the contact enjoyable, but also surreal. I had trouble seeing Beane as an actual person. Like millions of others, I already knew him from Michael Lewis’ book Moneyball, about the remaking of the Oakland A’s a decade ago. To me Beane was a great literary character, like Winston Smith or Holden Caul?eld.
We know most of his story from the book: The son of a naval of?cer grows up to be a brilliant teenage athlete, courted by major-league baseball clubs and elite college football programs. In the junk room this morning, I ask whether he ever played soccer.
“Not once,” says Beane.
Did he never even kick a ball?
“We had a hybrid game at junior high we called speedball, which would disgust anybody from outside the United States. You could actually catch the ball in the air and throw it. I did have a Pelé poster on my wall from the Cosmos. Most Americans in the ’70s knew Pelé. They weren’t quite sure what he did, but they knew of him.”
In the classic high school divide, Beane was both jock and nerd. His parents, who had married young and never had a shot at college, wanted Billy to use his brain. “Our family wasn’t particularly well-off,” says Beane. “Really, the reason my dad introduced me to sports was the ability to acquire a college scholarship. It was a way to pay for college.”
That’s why in 1980 the Beane family was excited when Stanford tried to recruit him as a quarterback. Beane likes to joke that if he’d accepted the scholarship, you’d never have heard of the guy who was then Stanford’s quarterback, John Elway. Anyway, Beane turned down Stanford. The New York Mets were offering him $125,000 to play baseball, and the middle-
class military kid felt he ought to take the money. Beane missed out on college.
“I don’t look at it as a regret now,” he says. “I’d say missed opportunity is probably a better way to put it. The people you’re going to school with, what you’re exposed to in future world leaders, senators—I missed that opportunity, and I don’t think you can really put a price tag on that. But it was a great life lesson.” Beane has tried never again to make a decision based on money alone.
Beane began playing in the minors, but from the beginning he had inklings of having chosen the wrong profession. He recalls: “I wanted to be the guy running the club. And as I’ve gotten older, I wanted to be the guy running the business, because it’s such an important part of sports now.”
Beane never became the great player the scouts had seen in him. “As a baseball failure—” I begin my question.
Beane pulls a pained face: “Can we… do we have another…? Is there a synonym that we can use? How about ‘my relative success’?”
He did, after all, make the major leagues. In 1990 he was a 27-year-old outfielder with the Oakland A’s. That was when he walked into the A’s front of?ce and said he wanted to quit playing and become an advance scout. As Lewis notes in Moneyball, nobody ever quits the bigs
at age 27 to become a scout. But Beane wanted to be the guy running the show.
Naturally, he treated his new career as a kind of further education—graduate school, if you like, at the University of Billy Beane. The great thing was that baseball at the time had recently acquired its very own revolutionary intellectual movement: sabermetrics. The story of Moneyball is how Beane became general manager of the A’s and reformed the club along sabermetric lines. “We just stole these ideas from people smarter than ourselves,” he says now, then corrects himself: “Stole, that’s the wrong word.”
Beane hired smart young statisticians, like 24-year-old Harvard grad Paul DePodesta. Their job was to ?nd undervalued players, and to further Billy Beane’s education at the same time.
As Moneyball records, stats worked for the A’s. Whereas other clubs did things because they’d always done them that way, the A’s came up with new ways of running a baseball club. Whereas other clubs tried to recruit living Greek statues like the 18-year-old Billy Beane, the A’s were quite happy to sign fat players. “Big-boned is the term we prefer to use,” chuckles Beane. Always they were trying to ?nd players who had been undervalued by other clubs.
Other people began to notice. In 2002 John Henry, owner of the Boston Red Sox, tried to lure Beane to Boston. He offered him a minimum of $12.5 million over ?ve years, more than a GM in baseball had ever been paid. Beane ?rst said yes, but then he said no. He wasn’t going to make a decision based on money again. Instead, Henry hired a 28-year-old Yale graduate named Theo Epstein.
The A’s punched above their weight for years. The team won the American League West four times between 2000 and 2006. With a bit more luck they might have made it to a World Series.
And there the story might have ended, with Beane a minor celebrity at a small club, but for the fact that he had met a clever guy who lived down the road from the Oakland Coliseum: Michael Lewis.
The University of Billy Beane is always on the lookout for visiting professors. Lewis, the master of business books, was the perfect candidate for a man who had educated himself largely from business books. “I consider him both a friend and an incredibly stimulating person to be around,” says Beane. Partly for that reason, and partly because Beane is a canny businessman who knows the value of publicity, he let Lewis hang around for a year. In 2003 Lewis published Moneyball. Suddenly everyone in baseball knew what Beane and his fat A’s had been doing.
More and more clubs began to copy them. Baseball, says Beane now, “has turned into more of a science—I think more of a science than even people will publicize.” But Moneyball’s in?uence goes even further: It changed other sports, too. In 2004 an NBA team hired a full-time statistician for the first time. Now they all have statisticians. And from there the revolution spread across the Atlantic to sports like rugby, cricket, and even soccer.
The conquest of baseball by Moneyball methods was formally sealed in 2004, when the Red Sox of John Henry and Theo Epstein won the club’s ?rst World Series since 1918. In 2007 they won another. In a way these were triumphs for Beane, but they weren’t visible triumphs.
Once almost everyone in baseball went Moneyball, the A’s lost their advantage.
It’s surely no coincidence that, as the A’s have tailed off somewhat, Beane has developed an obsession with soccer.
It began when Beane’s wife had a birthday. Like most men, Beane couldn’t think of a present. He panicked. Luckily, he says, “I had a cheap ?ight to London. So I said, ‘Hey, honey, we’re going to London for your birthday.’?”
“I didn’t go over anticipating falling in love with soccer,” he claims now. But, inevitably, he did treat the trip as a sort of seminar in English culture. Every morning in London he’d study the British newspapers. He noticed that they barely ran a word about the NFL or baseball. Instead, they went on about soccer all the time. On romantic strolls with his wife, Beane noticed that in front of almost every pub was a chalkboard with the times of that day’s televised soccer matches. From the A’s junk room he recalls, “I’m a big college football fan here, and it was very similar to how college football is in the South, where you have this passion and you have a large number of massive fans in this small area.”
Back home in California, Beane started studying for his major in soccer. “I literally have read every piece of literature I could ?nd on it,” he says.
But Beane is a jock as well as a nerd, and the other thing that drew him to soccer was the athleticism of the players. It turned out they weren’t little wimps at all. Watching them, Beane saw that “these are the exact same guys who are playing our sports. They just chose this sport. Had they grown up in the States, they would be playing at the highest level at whatever sport they did.” For instance, when other Americans ask him what Barcelona star Lionel Messi is like, Beane will say, “Well, just imagine if you had Barry Sanders—who’s one of the greatest running backs in the history of the NFL—his quickness and his ability to change direction, with the vision of Steve Nash on a basketball court. That’s Lionel Messi.”
Just around the time Beane became interested in soccer, something fortuitous happened: People in soccer became interested in him. Beane got friendly with soccer execs like Arsenal’s Damien Comolli, Bolton Wanderers’ Mike Forde, and a German expat in California named Jürgen Klinsmann. When the legendary striker later became manager of the German national team, he hired more sports scientists than anyone in soccer had ever seen and guided Germany to a surprising third place at the 2006 World Cup. Afterward Klinsmann joined German super-team Bayern Munich and sent Beane a Bayern shirt with billy beane on the back. Beane liked the shirt but admits he is too self-conscious to wear it into the local Starbucks. (In July Klinsmann was named manager of the U.S. national team.)
Beane had become a soccer junkie. However, he still spent his days surrounded by baseball junkies, paid to think and talk about baseball. That couldn’t last. The University of Billy Beane needed a small soccer faculty. One day when the A’s were looking for a new young statistician, Beane interviewed an MIT economics graduate named Farhan Zaidi.
At this point in the conversation, Beane summons Farhan, a cheery, small, round guy with a sense of humor. He’s the kind of person you’d expect to meet late one night after a gig at a bar in a college town, not in a professional sports club. At MIT he specialized in behavioral economics. (“Like that’s real useful,” teases Beane.) But when Farhan came for his job interview, Beane quizzed him on one topic: Oasis, the favorite band of both men. When it then transpired that Farhan was a soccer junkie, too, he was hired. “I tried to direct the conversation in each of those directions,” Farhan admits now.
Farhan had been to the World Cups in 1998 and 2002. When World Cup 2006 in Germany came around, they both reasoned that they really ought to go, even if it happened to fall in the middle of the baseball season. Together with A’s owner Lew Wolff, they played hooky and ?ew over. “We were just like college kids with backpacks, shorts, going to every match we could,” Beane recalls.
After that World Cup, whenever the A’s players teased Beane about soccer, he’d tell them, “The rest of the world can’t be wrong.” The main thing that had struck him in Germany was the emotion of the fans. You didn’t see that so much in American sports. He drew two conclusions: Where there’s emotion, there’s money to be made. And where there’s emotion, people are probably making emotional decisions.
Rational Moneyball thinking might have a place in soccer too.
In 2005 Beane’s best friend in soccer, Damien Comolli, became technical director of Totenham Hotspurr (a.k.a. Spurs) and did his best to turn them into a sort of London version of the A’s. Comolli used the new data becoming available (on numbers of tackles, miles run, shots on target, shots stopped, and so on) to value soccer players.
In 2007 Comolli paid $14 million to bring an unknown 17-year-old left-back named Gareth Bale to the team. It seemed an absurd sum. Bale came from little Southampton and had played
only a couple of internationals for not-very-fashionable Wales. But on the phone to Oakland, Comolli would talk about him with great excitement.
A couple of summers ago, when Spurs visited California, Beane got to see Bale up close. He recognized the type at once: “An 18-, 19-year-old kid, broad-shouldered, lean.” Bale was fast, athletic, and strong—a most unusual combination. Beane says, “If he were in the States, he would never have touched a soccer ball. He’d be playing wide receiver for the New York Jets, he’d be playing center ?eld for a major-league baseball team, or he’d be a shooting guard for an NBA team.” The great athletes, whatever their sports, are each other’s brothers. By the time Bale was 20, it was clear he was a sort of superman.
In October 2010 the news had broken that John Henry, the Red Sox owner, was in England.
He’d flown over to buy Liverpool, one of England’s blue-chip soccer clubs. Beane was enthused by the impending deal. Henry had perfected Moneyball at the Red Sox. Imagine, mused Beane, if he could do something similar in soccer. Beane says, “John understands numbers, and in sports it’s about numbers. John is a very rational person.”
“He tried to hire you,” I say.
“Well, that’s the irrational part of him,” said Beane.
A few weeks after Henry’s purchase, French papers reported that Comolli would leave his then-club, St-Etienne, and predicted that he’d join Liverpool. So it proved. It was clear where John Henry had been getting his advice on potential soccer hires. Henry was indeed planning
a “Moneyball of soccer,” hampered only by his near-total ignorance of the sport.
It must have been useful to ask Mr. Moneyball himself for the right direction.
A lot of calls now ping back and forth between Liverpool and Oakland. In the A’s junk room, Beane says, “Damien, you can call him anytime. He’s up all the time. I’ll e-mail him, and it will be two in the morning there, and he’ll be up and he’ll say, ‘Hey, I’m up watching the A’s game,’ because he watches a lot of A’s games on the computer. The guy never sleeps.” It seems that Beane has become an unpaid consultant to Liverpool’s Moneyball project.
At the end of the interview in the junk room, I give Beane an old baseball card of himself to sign. billy beane: out?eld, it says. It’s from 1987, when he was back in the majors with the Minnesota Twins. The season before, according to the card, he’d batted .213.
Beane takes the card from me and studies it. “I think this is at the old Cleveland Stadium,” he says, even though about the only thing you can see behind the young Beane in the picture is a batting cage. “You know, you take these when you’re 22, and you don’t think you’re going to be immortalized for the rest of your life, and you sure wish you’d shaved that day.” I realize then how much of his life he’s spent being seen through a slightly distorted medium: through baseball cards, through that Greek statue of a body, through Michael Lewis, and now through Brad Pitt.
Beane goes off with the A’s stadium manager to ?nd a sandwich. Then he comes back, and he and Farhan sprawl on the battered sofas and talk soccer, baseball, data, and irrationality off-the-record for half the afternoon.
Ted Williams .406 Season Turns 70
Ted Williams had MLB's last .400 batting average in 1941, and here are some tidbits about it noted by the NYT:
The steadiness of Williams’s season is best, and most appropriately, borne out in numbers.
¶ Begin with these: 185 hits, 147 walks, 27 strikeouts and a .553 on-base percentage in 606 plate appearances.
¶ After missing most of April with a broken bone in his right foot, Williams hit .436 in May.
¶ From May 17 to 30, he hit .536.
¶ During his 56-game hitting streak, DiMaggio batted .408. During the same stretch of games, Williams hit .412.
¶ Williams started a 23-game hitting streak, the longest of his career, on May 15, the same day DiMaggio began his streak. During his hitting streak, Williams batted .489.
¶ Williams hit .470 against the Yankees, who won the American League pennant by 17 games behind a pitching staff that yielded the fewest runs and hits.
¶ He was hitless in only 22 of the 143 games he played.
¶ His longest hitless stretch was seven at-bats.
¶ He had just three infield hits.
¶ His slugging percentage was .735. Until Mark McGwire in 1998, only five players in either league had recorded a higher single-season mark.
¶ Sacrifice flies were counted as at-bats. Under today’s rules, Williams might have hit .411 to .419, based on accounts of games that season.
In an essay within the 1994 book “Ted Williams: A Portrait in Words and Pictures,” the Harvard paleontologist and popular science writer Stephen Jay Gould called Williams’s 1941 season “the greatest achievement in 20th-century hitting” and “a lesson to all who value the best in human possibility.”
Ted Williams’s .406 Is More Than a Number
BILL PENNINGTON
September 17, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/sports/baseball/ted-williamss-406-average-is-more-than-a-number.html
The steadiness of Williams’s season is best, and most appropriately, borne out in numbers.
¶ Begin with these: 185 hits, 147 walks, 27 strikeouts and a .553 on-base percentage in 606 plate appearances.
¶ After missing most of April with a broken bone in his right foot, Williams hit .436 in May.
¶ From May 17 to 30, he hit .536.
¶ During his 56-game hitting streak, DiMaggio batted .408. During the same stretch of games, Williams hit .412.
¶ Williams started a 23-game hitting streak, the longest of his career, on May 15, the same day DiMaggio began his streak. During his hitting streak, Williams batted .489.
¶ Williams hit .470 against the Yankees, who won the American League pennant by 17 games behind a pitching staff that yielded the fewest runs and hits.
¶ He was hitless in only 22 of the 143 games he played.
¶ His longest hitless stretch was seven at-bats.
¶ He had just three infield hits.
¶ His slugging percentage was .735. Until Mark McGwire in 1998, only five players in either league had recorded a higher single-season mark.
¶ Sacrifice flies were counted as at-bats. Under today’s rules, Williams might have hit .411 to .419, based on accounts of games that season.
In an essay within the 1994 book “Ted Williams: A Portrait in Words and Pictures,” the Harvard paleontologist and popular science writer Stephen Jay Gould called Williams’s 1941 season “the greatest achievement in 20th-century hitting” and “a lesson to all who value the best in human possibility.”
Ted Williams’s .406 Is More Than a Number
BILL PENNINGTON
September 17, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/sports/baseball/ted-williamss-406-average-is-more-than-a-number.html
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Konformist Book Club: The 300 Club
Robalini's Note: With Tim Wakefield having just reached 200 wins and Justin Verlander flirting with the possibility of 30 wins this year with a great playoff run, now is a good time to check out a book on the evolution (and possible extinction) of the 300-game winner...
The 300 Club: Have We Seen the Last of Baseball's 300-Game Winners?
Dan Schlossberg (Author), Wayne Hagin (Author)
List Price: $24.95
Price: $18.02 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25.
You Save: $6.93 (28%)
Since the beginning of Major League Baseball in 1876, only two dozen pitchers have won 300 games. And because of new philosophies about pitch counts, the role of relief pitchers, shrinking strike zones, and five-man rotations, there's a good chance that the 300 Club has admitted its last member.
In The 300 Club - Last of a Breed - author Dan Schlossberg chronicles the most exclusive fraternity in baseball. Beginning with Cy Young and Walter Johnson, the only two players to win more than 400 games, the book reviews the careers of all 24 pitchers in the club. Exclusive interviews with 10 living 300-game winners, including Randy Johnson, Roger Clemens, and Greg Maddux, form the heart of the book. Johnson was the last pitcher to join the club, winning his 300th during the 2009 baseball season.
The book also investigates the very real possibility that no pitcher will win 300 games again. Changes in relief pitching, salaries, starting rotations, and injuries are conspiring to keep the 300 Club "closed." Sprinkled with rare photos from the archives of the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, New York, this book explains how this unusual collection of 24 men managed to win so many games, and why other standouts, such as Bob Gibson, Don Drysdale, and Sandy Koufax, fell short of the magic number.
The 300 Club is about "the last of a breed," but the book is the first of its kind - a fast-paced and thorough exploration of the best pitchers the game has ever seen.
Hardcover: 288 pages
Publisher: Ascend Books (May 15, 2010)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0984113037
ISBN-13: 978-0984113033
URL: http://www.amazon.com/300-Club-Baseballs-300-Game-Winners/dp/0984113037/thekonformist
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Robalini's MLB Realignment Plan
Robert Sterling
Konformist.com
8-17-11
There's been a lot of talk of realignment in Major League Baseball, and not all of it is good. The simplest talk is to move one team from the National League and put it in the AL, so both leagues have 15 team. This looks like a done deal, with either the Houston Astros or Arizona Diamondbacks moving to the American League West (with the Astros moving to the NL West if it's the D-Backs so there's 6 five team divisions.) Though the Texas Rangers want it to be the Astros to have an interstate division rivalry, the Astros are balking at the idea, so I'm betting on Arizona. Either way, this would be a pretty harmless move, with the biggest change in having interleague play all year round.
A more radical option would be to have two 15-team leagues, but have no divisions. Then, the top four teams (or five, with the final two teams in each league playing a one game playoff) making it to the postseason. This plan is a step entirely in the wrong direction, essentially killing off the excitement of the pennant race.
This is the elephant in the room few are acknowledging: having a wild card in baseball's postseason has been a failure as an experiment for MLB. The one thing the wild card allowed was for Boston and New York meet in the postseason, and their epic 2004 series is probably baseball's most shining moment over the last decade. But no matter how enjoyable that series was (at least for non-Yankee fans) it in no way makes up for the loss of excitement in pennant races. For the most part since the wild card was introduced in 1995, many exciting potential pennant races (especially between the Yankees and the Red Sox) have been nullified since both teams were headed to the postseason either way. The move to add a second wild card in each league that will have a playoff with the first is merely a bandaid, an attempt to add some benefit in winning the division that isn't there.
The answer to the problem isn't to add wild cards, but rather to create four divisions in each league. You still would have eight teams in the postseason, but they would all have to win their division or go home. This creates eight pennant races each season, with the likelihood of more than a couple being rather close.
To create eight divisions, ideally you need four teams in each division, which would require two expansion teams. Here's how I look at the expansion city options, while adding two teams to the mix:
* This is the easy one, moving the Oakland Athletics to San Jose, something which appears likely to eventually happen anyway, whenever the San Francisco 49ers get a stadium built at Great America in Santa Clara. Oakland is just not a major league city anymore, and San Jose being the heart of the Silicon Valley makes it a marketing winner.
* The Tampa Bay Rays, like Oakland, just can't hold its own as a baseball market. It has more to do with the location of its stadium than anything else, but when an organization puts together such a good team and attendance still flounders, it is clear that a city isn't ready for primetime.
This leaves openings for three more teams. Here's my picks:
* Portland. The US city with the largest independent metropolitan area without a MLB team. Has a long history of minor league baseball, and would be a perfect Pacific Northwest rival to both Seattle and San Jose.
* Las Vegas. I don't say this just to be a home town booster. Vegas is one of the biggest metro areas without a baseball team, and even with the economic downturn, all the other options lack the style and flash of Sin City. No ballplayer will complain about visiting here. Also, a team called the Area 51s would be an awesome addition to the MLB.
* Charlotte. If you use the combined statistical area, it's actually an even bigger metro area than Portland. Further, there is room for baseball to grow in the Southeast, and the hi-tech area of North Carolina is a logical pick.
Here's my view of the other options, and why they wouldn't work:
* Montreal: Yes, it's a bigger metro than any US city without a baseball team. But it's had a team already and failed. Let somebody else have a try.
* San Juan or Mexico: With the world economic crisis, it just is too risky to have any team in Mexico. Maybe someday, but not now. Likewise, though Puerto Rico would have huge attendance, there are big economic issues there, and players would balk at the extra travel distance.
* Sacramento, Orlando, or Virginia: The problem with all these areas is there already are teams in the same state or metro region. Sacramento has the Athletics & Giants, Orlando has Miami and (for now, at least) Tampa Bay and Virginia has the Washington Nationals and Baltimore Orioles.
* New Jersey or Brooklyn: New Jersey or Brooklyn (or anywhere in Metro NY) would be a perfect place for another baseball team. But the Yankees would block any such move. End of story.
* San Antonio, Indiana, Oklahoma City, Nashville & New Orleans: San Antonio's only strike is that it too is in a state with two teams, who don't want competition for TV deals. Otherwise it would be a perfect fit. Indiana and Oklahoma City are on the cusp, but Charlotte has better arguments than they do. Nashville is not quite on the MLB level yet, and New Orleans is still recovering from Katrina. In any case, all these teams are good options after Charlotte for a team in the southern region.
That said, here's how the divisions would like in my plan:
NL
North
Chicago
Cincinnati
Milwaukee
St. Louis
South
Atlanta
Charlotte
Houston
Miami
West
Colorado
Los Angeles
San Diego
San Francisco
East
New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington
AL
North
Chicago
Cleveland
Detroit
Minnesota
South
Arizona
Kansas City
Las Vegas
Texas
West
Los Angeles
Portland
San Jose
Seattle
East
Baltimore
Boston
New York
Toronto
The main problem with this plan is that Baltimore & Toronto are still stuck in the same division as the two-headed beast of the Yankees-Red Sox. But it seems whoever shares a division with Boston or New York would be left with the short end of the stick. I think the best plan is to keep division races as regional affairs, but to have schedule based on team salary. Each league would have teams put into four groups each season based on their total salary, and their schedule would be weighed towards their salary level and not by division. I believe that would be a more effective way to balance team salaries than a cap.
Of course, the other complaint of this plan is that it forces Boston and New York to both compete for the same postseason opening, and would sometimes mean the team with the second best record in the league would be out of the postseason. But I consider this a virtue. For example, right now the Yankees and Red Sox are separated by a mere half game in the standings. Without a wild card, the battle to win the division would be a major story, but instead there is little attention to it. It's better to have a system that creates more excitement than one that rewards a very good team that didn't close the deal.
For more info on expansion team options:
Ranking the Top 10 Markets for Relocation or Expansion
Maury Brown
Tuesday, 05 August 2008
http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2387:ranking-the-top-10-markets-for-relocation-or-expansion&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39
Re-Ranking the Top 10 Markets for Relocation or Expansion
Joe Tetreault
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4700:re-ranking-the-top-10-markets-for-relocation-or-expansion&catid=83:joe-tetreault-article-archive&Itemid=192
Metropolitian population statistics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Combined_Statistical_Areas
Konformist.com
8-17-11
There's been a lot of talk of realignment in Major League Baseball, and not all of it is good. The simplest talk is to move one team from the National League and put it in the AL, so both leagues have 15 team. This looks like a done deal, with either the Houston Astros or Arizona Diamondbacks moving to the American League West (with the Astros moving to the NL West if it's the D-Backs so there's 6 five team divisions.) Though the Texas Rangers want it to be the Astros to have an interstate division rivalry, the Astros are balking at the idea, so I'm betting on Arizona. Either way, this would be a pretty harmless move, with the biggest change in having interleague play all year round.
A more radical option would be to have two 15-team leagues, but have no divisions. Then, the top four teams (or five, with the final two teams in each league playing a one game playoff) making it to the postseason. This plan is a step entirely in the wrong direction, essentially killing off the excitement of the pennant race.
This is the elephant in the room few are acknowledging: having a wild card in baseball's postseason has been a failure as an experiment for MLB. The one thing the wild card allowed was for Boston and New York meet in the postseason, and their epic 2004 series is probably baseball's most shining moment over the last decade. But no matter how enjoyable that series was (at least for non-Yankee fans) it in no way makes up for the loss of excitement in pennant races. For the most part since the wild card was introduced in 1995, many exciting potential pennant races (especially between the Yankees and the Red Sox) have been nullified since both teams were headed to the postseason either way. The move to add a second wild card in each league that will have a playoff with the first is merely a bandaid, an attempt to add some benefit in winning the division that isn't there.
The answer to the problem isn't to add wild cards, but rather to create four divisions in each league. You still would have eight teams in the postseason, but they would all have to win their division or go home. This creates eight pennant races each season, with the likelihood of more than a couple being rather close.
To create eight divisions, ideally you need four teams in each division, which would require two expansion teams. Here's how I look at the expansion city options, while adding two teams to the mix:
* This is the easy one, moving the Oakland Athletics to San Jose, something which appears likely to eventually happen anyway, whenever the San Francisco 49ers get a stadium built at Great America in Santa Clara. Oakland is just not a major league city anymore, and San Jose being the heart of the Silicon Valley makes it a marketing winner.
* The Tampa Bay Rays, like Oakland, just can't hold its own as a baseball market. It has more to do with the location of its stadium than anything else, but when an organization puts together such a good team and attendance still flounders, it is clear that a city isn't ready for primetime.
This leaves openings for three more teams. Here's my picks:
* Portland. The US city with the largest independent metropolitan area without a MLB team. Has a long history of minor league baseball, and would be a perfect Pacific Northwest rival to both Seattle and San Jose.
* Las Vegas. I don't say this just to be a home town booster. Vegas is one of the biggest metro areas without a baseball team, and even with the economic downturn, all the other options lack the style and flash of Sin City. No ballplayer will complain about visiting here. Also, a team called the Area 51s would be an awesome addition to the MLB.
* Charlotte. If you use the combined statistical area, it's actually an even bigger metro area than Portland. Further, there is room for baseball to grow in the Southeast, and the hi-tech area of North Carolina is a logical pick.
Here's my view of the other options, and why they wouldn't work:
* Montreal: Yes, it's a bigger metro than any US city without a baseball team. But it's had a team already and failed. Let somebody else have a try.
* San Juan or Mexico: With the world economic crisis, it just is too risky to have any team in Mexico. Maybe someday, but not now. Likewise, though Puerto Rico would have huge attendance, there are big economic issues there, and players would balk at the extra travel distance.
* Sacramento, Orlando, or Virginia: The problem with all these areas is there already are teams in the same state or metro region. Sacramento has the Athletics & Giants, Orlando has Miami and (for now, at least) Tampa Bay and Virginia has the Washington Nationals and Baltimore Orioles.
* New Jersey or Brooklyn: New Jersey or Brooklyn (or anywhere in Metro NY) would be a perfect place for another baseball team. But the Yankees would block any such move. End of story.
* San Antonio, Indiana, Oklahoma City, Nashville & New Orleans: San Antonio's only strike is that it too is in a state with two teams, who don't want competition for TV deals. Otherwise it would be a perfect fit. Indiana and Oklahoma City are on the cusp, but Charlotte has better arguments than they do. Nashville is not quite on the MLB level yet, and New Orleans is still recovering from Katrina. In any case, all these teams are good options after Charlotte for a team in the southern region.
That said, here's how the divisions would like in my plan:
NL
North
Chicago
Cincinnati
Milwaukee
St. Louis
South
Atlanta
Charlotte
Houston
Miami
West
Colorado
Los Angeles
San Diego
San Francisco
East
New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington
AL
North
Chicago
Cleveland
Detroit
Minnesota
South
Arizona
Kansas City
Las Vegas
Texas
West
Los Angeles
Portland
San Jose
Seattle
East
Baltimore
Boston
New York
Toronto
The main problem with this plan is that Baltimore & Toronto are still stuck in the same division as the two-headed beast of the Yankees-Red Sox. But it seems whoever shares a division with Boston or New York would be left with the short end of the stick. I think the best plan is to keep division races as regional affairs, but to have schedule based on team salary. Each league would have teams put into four groups each season based on their total salary, and their schedule would be weighed towards their salary level and not by division. I believe that would be a more effective way to balance team salaries than a cap.
Of course, the other complaint of this plan is that it forces Boston and New York to both compete for the same postseason opening, and would sometimes mean the team with the second best record in the league would be out of the postseason. But I consider this a virtue. For example, right now the Yankees and Red Sox are separated by a mere half game in the standings. Without a wild card, the battle to win the division would be a major story, but instead there is little attention to it. It's better to have a system that creates more excitement than one that rewards a very good team that didn't close the deal.
For more info on expansion team options:
Ranking the Top 10 Markets for Relocation or Expansion
Maury Brown
Tuesday, 05 August 2008
http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2387:ranking-the-top-10-markets-for-relocation-or-expansion&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39
Re-Ranking the Top 10 Markets for Relocation or Expansion
Joe Tetreault
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4700:re-ranking-the-top-10-markets-for-relocation-or-expansion&catid=83:joe-tetreault-article-archive&Itemid=192
Metropolitian population statistics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Combined_Statistical_Areas
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

