User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.7729 seconds
82 querie(s) executed
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
WaPo: Boswell: For Many Teams, Small-Ball Efforts Are Being Richly Rewarded
Get ‘em on, get ‘em over, get ‘em in, get ‘em...with “brains and judgment”?
It’s no accident that the rise of mid-market teams has coincided with the decrease in performance-enhancing drugs. The artificially inflated sluggers and strikeout pitchers of recent years commanded the most astronomical salaries. Plenty of the richest didn’t cheat. But too many did. To reach the top of the heap, some teams had to hold their noses and pay inflated salaries for superstars with muscles-from-a-bottle. Now, that’s changing.
Last season, home runs were down almost 10 percent in the majors. Only one man hit 50 homers. More important, only 27 players hit 30 home runs—less than one per team. That would be comparable to just 15 players with 30 homers back in the many decades when there were only 16 teams. Homers are still a bit too cheap, but that’s due more to the cozy new retro ballparks than cheating. The tiny yards of Philadelphia and Cincinnati would have added dozens of homers for Hank Aaron, Willie Mays and Frank Robinson, who now see their career totals threatened by suspect 21st-century gentlemen.
My Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: MLB, Granderson join anti-obesity effort
(88 - 7:58pm, Feb 09)
Last: what the hell, just use your initials or something
(88 - 7:58pm, Feb 09)
Last: what the hell, just use your initials or something
Newsblog: Hardball Talk: Gleeman: Lenny Dykstra is back with some more can't miss investment advice
(117 - 7:52pm, Feb 09)
Last: what the hell, just use your initials or something
(117 - 7:52pm, Feb 09)
Last: what the hell, just use your initials or something
Newsblog: Joe Torre on "Castle"
(11 - 7:36pm, Feb 09)
Last: B.G. Gamesh Reeks of Anti-Yankee Bias (w/Zombies)
(11 - 7:36pm, Feb 09)
Last: B.G. Gamesh Reeks of Anti-Yankee Bias (w/Zombies)
Newsblog: Former Lotte Giants catcher dies (after 10 years in a coma after collapsing during a game)
(7 - 7:20pm, Feb 09)
Last: Trevor Crowe T. Robot (Dan Lee)
(7 - 7:20pm, Feb 09)
Last: Trevor Crowe T. Robot (Dan Lee)
Newsblog: NYBD: Silva: Bill James Accused Elias of Being “About Money”
(56 - 7:13pm, Feb 09)
Last: Monty
(56 - 7:13pm, Feb 09)
Last: Monty
Newsblog: Kansas City Kansan: Sloan: It's time to trade Greinke, Soria
(52 - 7:11pm, Feb 09)
Last: snapper
(52 - 7:11pm, Feb 09)
Last: snapper
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2008 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Then again I look at the American League and see that the four defending playoff teams are from Boston, New York, Chicago, and L.A. of A. -- your basic huge markets, none of them hurting for payroll. The smartest and smallest-ball of them just took on huge contracts in Paul Konerko and Jim Thome, your basic fence-busters.
To say nothing of the deeply massaged assertion that Alfonso Soriano is somehow not essentially a home-run hitter.
Sigh. I think that sometimes writers who perceive trends actually weaken their argument by trying to make all the evidence align with the trend they're pushing.
What rise? The only non-major market playoff team last year was the Padres, and they weren't very good.
Maybe we should discount Willie's totals because of his environment?
Seriously, for some reason everyone seems to ignore the fact that when Banks, Mays, Mathews, et al were cranking 'em out in the '50s, they were playing in what was, until the last 7 years, the most HR friendly environment in history.
How many people realize that it was easier to hit HRs in the 1950s than in the 1990s? Between 1950 and 1959 there were 8 seasons where the average HR/G in the NL (where most of the premier sluggers played) was .90 or higher - between 1990 and 1999 there were 6 such seasons.
And yes, it did get more difficult for Mays and friends in the '60s ... but not as difficult as it would be in the '80s for Murphy, Dawson and friends.
Were Aaron and Mays great homerun hitters? Hell yes! But is it possible that they also benefited from the era they played in? Definitely yes.
Dr. Love, St. Louis is one of the smallest markets in major-league sports.
Don't confuse payroll or attendance with market.
Weren't the Polo Grounds actually a pretty severe pitcher's park? I know that it was a hitter's era, but that place was a cavern, wasn't it?
When you use the local tv markets, yes. But you've got to remember that regional cable brings Fox Sports Midwest to Arkansas, Tennessee, Illinois south of Decatur, etc. The Cards have a decent sized market spread out over an abnormally large geographic area.
Certainly its a testament to their popularity in the greater st. louis region that their attendance is so high for weekday games, but a very siginifant percentage (note: I'm making this claim based on anecdotal evidence) of attendance on weekend games comes from families making a 4 hour weekend trip into the city for their annual weekend of Cards games.
Polo Grounds park factors '51-'57:
101,101,102,101,100,99,100
Nobody could hit the ball out to center, but down the lines was easy. The wide OF made for lots of extra base hits.
Another interesting point is that for most of these years the NL parks were very tightly bunched. The park factors were generally in the range 97-103; nothing like today where a park like Colorado dominates or like in the 70s when Dodger Stadium and the Astrodome did for pitchers.
Nothing like the mid-markets of Chicago (3rd largest in the U.S.) and Houston (4th)...
But, as Opening Day arrives, at least 20 teams are firmly convinced that their budgets will not prevent them from making the playoffs.
So, only 10 teams have a shot at 8 playoff spots?
Maybe we should discount Willie's totals because of his environment?
Seriously, for some reason everyone seems to ignore the fact that when Banks, Mays, Mathews, et al were cranking 'em out in the '50s, they were playing in what was, until the last 7 years, the most HR friendly environment in history.
Of course, the main difference then and now is those guys in the 1950's weren't widely perceived during their time as having acquired at least some of their power by illicit means.
Has there been any definitive study about how baseball got from the 1950's style to mid-80's Whitey-ball? What were the factors? Bigger parks? Deader balls? The diversification of the player base?
And could it happen again? (After watching the WBC, I am wondering if an increasing amount of MLB players coming from the Pacific Rim will have an effect of this sort.)
Will NOT prevent them from making the playoffs, Barry.
I don't understand it, either, but Houston is definitely mid-market when it comes to payroll and, I guess, regional TV revenue.
What I meant was that it was hard to hit homers in the Polo Grounds, because the statement was specifically about Mays' homers. What was the Park Factor for homers only?
So they choose to spend less on payroll, and run their company inefficiently.
Indeed. And even farther than that. Its less so now with expansion teams and other games teams on TV but the Cards still have a pretty wide fanbase in all sorts of places, esp in the south and west. I know people whose grandparents would grow up Cards fans no where near StL and it would just get passed down.
Less as compared to what? Or whom? They choose to spend less even though they have more to spend? Because they say they don't.
I'm not sure I get the inefficient part.
I think he's saying that they don't maximise their market.
I don't know if I agree - I think there's only so much a team can do to generate interest, and populations aren't blank slates. Interest in baseball does vary by region.
If I've been lectured correctly, large population market equals a lot of money to a baseball team. Big markets result in big revenues and that results in winning baseball. Thats how it all works. Just see the Yankees. They are run by monkeys, but they're fortunate enough to be surrounded by 20 million other monkeys.
The Astros are in the 4th largest market in the country, in a state somewhat supposedly interested in baseball. Natural law tells me they must have huge revenues, therefore, they are choosing to have a lower payroll than they can support, given their revenues.
I'm not sure I get the inefficient part.
If their tv revenues are low, it's cuz they aren't marketing themselves well.
Several problems with this statement. First, its not clear at all that Houston ranks 4th in terms of market size. A glance at 1998 MSA figures shows it ranks 10th, not 4th. Things may have changed in the past 8 years, but not that much.
Second, a fan base is not restricted to the MSA. Some teams have a fan base that extends for several states, such as St. Louis, the Cubs, or Boston; I don't believe the same is true for Houston.
Third, I have never thought of Texas as being a state where people are particularly interested in baseball - I don't live there, but my perception is that football is king, and baseball clearly is second for most residents.
Given all of this, I'm not at all sure that they are being inefficient with their resources.
It seems like Houston would have an even greater advantage as the largest single-team market. It's not just being in a big market, it's being in a big market that is not carved up by multiple teams. New York supports this as a market than can support six teams, but only has two.
Someone needs to get their noses of a spr...ehm, column, and watch some games. Soriano does nothing but uppercut.
Maybe it's just because he loves that curveball in the dirt that he can't reach that I have that perception.
Looking at this, if anyone's underutilising their market, it's the Phillies.
Baton Rouge is about as far away from Houston as Youngstown, OH is from Detroit. Do you think there are any Tigers fans in Youngstown? I'd imagine that they are probably not even in the top 5 favorite teams there.
In no particular order... the Gulf Coast pretty much is Astros territory, as far as that goes. Still, and I don't know if it is a cultural difference or what, I have a lot harder time imagining someone driving in even from Beaumont or Austin to watch an Astros game (except very rarely) than I do someone from Iowa or Nebraska driving to St. Louis... the team doesn't strike me as being all that good at marketing; their yearly team slogans (last year was 'It's on!' I think) are a local joke, and you cannot watch the entire schedule of TV games because of the screwy arrangement between FSSW and the local carrier... I don't think it can be overstated how much this is a football first area. People like baseball, love to play it and because of the weather they can 10 months or more. But definitely front-runners when it comes to attending games. I think the Rockets have problems, too, unless they are winning alot. But Texans games are well-attended, or at least sold out, and they are terrible.
and the local papers are abysmal.
-- MWE
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main