League executives think that they must continually tinker with their sports rules in order to make their product "better."
The NFL went through several seasons tinkering with what constitutes "a catch" to the dismay of most fans.
Baseball has caught the tinkering bug.
The trial balloons floated this off-season could fill a New Mexico sky.
PITCH CLOCK. MLB wants to speed up games from 3.5 hours to a more manageable 3 hours or less. The reason is TV. TV wants clear start and stop times for their program blocks. They don't like 4 hour games. Since the action starts on the mound, MLB thinks that putting a pitcher on a 20 second pitch clock would speed up the game. But there is no cause and effect between the time a pitcher receives the ball on the mound on whether the throw will be a strike, ball or hit into play.
The real problem in dragging down the sequence is in the batter's box. After every pitch, a batter gets out of the box to adjust his armor, re-digs a foot hole, and makes several practice swings. A more feasible solution already exists; once a batter gets into the box, the ball is live. The batter should stay in the box for the entire at bat (with the exception of being knocked down). If a batter takes 15 seconds to reset after every pitch, and there are 250 pitches a game, in theory you could save an hour.
BAN THE SHIFT. MLB wants more offense, which means more balls in play. The big data stat gurus can plot the tendencies of every hitter and make comparison predictions on every type of pitch and pitcher. Teams employ the shift in order position the defense where the ball is most likely to be hit. Hitters complain that three fielders on one side makes it unfair, especially if one is in short right field.
But the solution is simple: learn to hit the ball where they ain't. If three players are on one side of the infield, there is a huge hole on the other side. Learn to hit the ball to the opposite field. Bunt for a single. There are many strategic alternatives an offense can employ to negate the shift. But hitters don't think they will get paid for drag bunts or measly singles. They are taught launch angles, hard contact and home run swings. They have not adapted to the new defensive alignments.
EXTRA INNINGS. MLB wants to end games quicker. It believes extra innings are boring and harmful to bullpens. So the idea is to drastically alter the fundamentals of the game by placing a runner at second base, in scoring position, for each extra inning. Why "gift" a runner in scoring position? Does that make the runner who scores "unearned?"
Other leagues have adopted quick finish overtimes. Th NFL has its strange rule where one team can win the game after the OT coin toss. Hockey adds a short extra period with less skaters, and if that does not work, a shoot-out. Soccer uses the shoot out only after another full period of regular play.
Baseball has always been a timeless game of innings. Only players, not rules, can manufacture scoring on the field. A problem with hitting philosophy today is that managers do not make their players manufacture runs (get a walk or bunt single, steal a base, perform a sacrifice fly) because those aspects of the game do not help an individual player's WAR or contract value. If a team wants to win a close game, you put pressure on the defense by manufacturing a winning run.
THREE BATTER RULE. MLB is fed up with the bullpen specialist. Managers are using one relief pitcher for one batter, then making multiple pitching changes in one inning. It seems like the strategy makes the game drag on. But the manager is paid to win games, and he has to use his roster to get his players the best opportunity to succeed. By forcing a pitcher to throw to at least 3 batters would actually artificially increase the change of injury to bullpen arms (not protecting valuable arms because specialization is now normal with 13 man bullpens).
The obvious way to lessen the impact of bullpen use is to get one's starters to pitch deeper into games. The large bullpens makes it easier to pull a starter in the 4th inning instead of the expected 7th or 8th inning performance. Also, if you want to make the strategy to use pitchers longer in games, mandate that teams can only have 11 pitchers on their staff (5 starters and 6 relievers). Bullpens would then have to be assembled with different roles from closer (1 IP) to set up men (1-2 IP) to real middle relievers (2-3 IP).
For every proposed rule, there is something already in the game to solve the alleged problem. More rules equate to more confusion.
Showing posts with label game. Show all posts
Showing posts with label game. Show all posts
February 15, 2019
December 8, 2018
THE SHIFT TOWARD OFFENSE
More and more sports leagues are trying to increase "offense" and "scoring" in order to lock in casual viewers into fans. There is almost a video game expectation that sports leaders want to market toward the public whom are immersed in their Fortnite and other battle royale games.
MLB has been whining about its game for a long time. First it was too much pitching. "Women love the long ball" campaign helped fuel the specter of the steroid era and juiced baseballs. Second, it was pace of play. Games were getting too long, people could not pay attention. Third, it was "engaging" the fans during games by pushing MLB stat and fantasy apps on their phones (ironically, causing fans in the stands to pay less attention to the actual game.)
The current bane of the MLB is the over-gospel use of advanced stats to "improve" the game. The current foil is the defensive shift. The shift is ruining the game, so they say. It is taking away hitting, run scoring - - - offense.
There is nothing against the rules about where you can place fielders on any given play, except for the pitcher, who has be in contact with the rubber 60 feet 6 inches away from the plate, and the catcher who has to sit in the catcher's box behind the plate. Otherwise, a team could place the seven other fielders in the infield - - - as close to the plate as possible (in bunting situations).
Advanced statistics provide data that shows tendencies of hitters. But even general experience will tell you that certain hitters are "pull" hitters and others "slap" or opposite field hitters. Pitchers have been taught to pitch against those tendencies. But adding another fielder, usually in the short outfield, takes away base hits, or so is the theory.
Yahoo Sports notes that the overall analysis of the shift is unclear.
The usage of shifts has gone from a rarity to begin the decade, to almost routine in 2018.
In 2010, Fangraph’s data on the frequency of defensive shifting shows that the Tampa Bay Rays under manager Joe Maddon employed the shift against a league-leading 261 batters.
In 2018, Maddon’s Cubs actually employed the lowest number of shifts to opposing batters with 631. But that low number is still nearly 150 percent higher than the league high just eight years ago.
In fact, only five teams, the Cubs, Angels, Padres, Rangers and Cardinals, shifted for less than 1,000 batters in 2018. The Chicago White Sox set the pace, shifting for 2,150 batters. Overall, teams shifted 17 percent of the time during the past regular season, which is nearly one in every five batters.
It has undeniably become a big part of the strategy across MLB. But has it really impacted the game in a negative way?
The success rate varies, and like all aspects of baseball relies on a degree of luck. Fangraphics digested the types of shifts being used, and the accompanying success rates. The five teams that shifted most frequently (infield and outfield) in 2018 did so an average of 11.9 times per game, with opposing batters averaging 3.3 hits against per games. That’s a .277 batting average. The five teams that shifted the least averaged five shifts per games. Opposing batters averaged 1.5 hits, or a .300 average.
Does that mean shifting more is better? Does that tell us that shifting is even having a notable impact? Not necessarily is the correct answer to both, yet there’s a crowd that’s convinced it’s unfairly dragging down offense in MLB.
There are some variables those numbers don’t account for. It doesn’t tell us the number of times a shifted defender saved a hit, or how often a hit went through his vacated position. But the overriding numbers tell the real story. Shifting does more to get people talking than it does to drain offense from the game.
The best way to counter a shift is to hit the ball where they are not. To stop the shift, a batter needs to be able to place the ball in the vacated area. And that usually means bunting the ball for a base hit. But that is viewed as a cowardly or unmanly way to get a hit. But it is not. It is part of the game. But players and agents focus more on the glamor stats: like HRs and RBIs than whether you got a measly bunt single.
It would be nice to hear the view of the late Tony Gywnn on the shift controversy. He probably would have told you that a batter has to make the adjustments. If you looked at his hitting chart, you could see that he sprayed the ball to all parts of the ball park. He was not a pure pull hitter, or an opposite field slap hitter. Just as others were taught to hit the ball "up the middle" to get solid contact, Gwynn was a pure hitter capable of adjusting his swing to the pitch, circumstance and the elements. But that type of hitting dedication is rare. It would seem scapegoating the shift instead of telling players to adjust is the easy way out to jump start some more offense.
There are old schoolers who just go by the mantra "hit em where they ain't." Some hitting coaches are now focused in on "launch angles" and contact velocity as the statistical means to get past the shift, because harder ground balls get through the shift faster, and no one can catch a HR ball except a fan in the stands.
Baseball should do nothing to affect the strategy evolutions in the game. Let the shift ride out its fad until the next great Big Data thing happens.
MLB has been whining about its game for a long time. First it was too much pitching. "Women love the long ball" campaign helped fuel the specter of the steroid era and juiced baseballs. Second, it was pace of play. Games were getting too long, people could not pay attention. Third, it was "engaging" the fans during games by pushing MLB stat and fantasy apps on their phones (ironically, causing fans in the stands to pay less attention to the actual game.)
The current bane of the MLB is the over-gospel use of advanced stats to "improve" the game. The current foil is the defensive shift. The shift is ruining the game, so they say. It is taking away hitting, run scoring - - - offense.
There is nothing against the rules about where you can place fielders on any given play, except for the pitcher, who has be in contact with the rubber 60 feet 6 inches away from the plate, and the catcher who has to sit in the catcher's box behind the plate. Otherwise, a team could place the seven other fielders in the infield - - - as close to the plate as possible (in bunting situations).
Advanced statistics provide data that shows tendencies of hitters. But even general experience will tell you that certain hitters are "pull" hitters and others "slap" or opposite field hitters. Pitchers have been taught to pitch against those tendencies. But adding another fielder, usually in the short outfield, takes away base hits, or so is the theory.
Yahoo Sports notes that the overall analysis of the shift is unclear.
The usage of shifts has gone from a rarity to begin the decade, to almost routine in 2018.
In 2010, Fangraph’s data on the frequency of defensive shifting shows that the Tampa Bay Rays under manager Joe Maddon employed the shift against a league-leading 261 batters.
In 2018, Maddon’s Cubs actually employed the lowest number of shifts to opposing batters with 631. But that low number is still nearly 150 percent higher than the league high just eight years ago.
In fact, only five teams, the Cubs, Angels, Padres, Rangers and Cardinals, shifted for less than 1,000 batters in 2018. The Chicago White Sox set the pace, shifting for 2,150 batters. Overall, teams shifted 17 percent of the time during the past regular season, which is nearly one in every five batters.
It has undeniably become a big part of the strategy across MLB. But has it really impacted the game in a negative way?
The success rate varies, and like all aspects of baseball relies on a degree of luck. Fangraphics digested the types of shifts being used, and the accompanying success rates. The five teams that shifted most frequently (infield and outfield) in 2018 did so an average of 11.9 times per game, with opposing batters averaging 3.3 hits against per games. That’s a .277 batting average. The five teams that shifted the least averaged five shifts per games. Opposing batters averaged 1.5 hits, or a .300 average.
Does that mean shifting more is better? Does that tell us that shifting is even having a notable impact? Not necessarily is the correct answer to both, yet there’s a crowd that’s convinced it’s unfairly dragging down offense in MLB.
There are some variables those numbers don’t account for. It doesn’t tell us the number of times a shifted defender saved a hit, or how often a hit went through his vacated position. But the overriding numbers tell the real story. Shifting does more to get people talking than it does to drain offense from the game.
The best way to counter a shift is to hit the ball where they are not. To stop the shift, a batter needs to be able to place the ball in the vacated area. And that usually means bunting the ball for a base hit. But that is viewed as a cowardly or unmanly way to get a hit. But it is not. It is part of the game. But players and agents focus more on the glamor stats: like HRs and RBIs than whether you got a measly bunt single.
It would be nice to hear the view of the late Tony Gywnn on the shift controversy. He probably would have told you that a batter has to make the adjustments. If you looked at his hitting chart, you could see that he sprayed the ball to all parts of the ball park. He was not a pure pull hitter, or an opposite field slap hitter. Just as others were taught to hit the ball "up the middle" to get solid contact, Gwynn was a pure hitter capable of adjusting his swing to the pitch, circumstance and the elements. But that type of hitting dedication is rare. It would seem scapegoating the shift instead of telling players to adjust is the easy way out to jump start some more offense.
There are old schoolers who just go by the mantra "hit em where they ain't." Some hitting coaches are now focused in on "launch angles" and contact velocity as the statistical means to get past the shift, because harder ground balls get through the shift faster, and no one can catch a HR ball except a fan in the stands.
Baseball should do nothing to affect the strategy evolutions in the game. Let the shift ride out its fad until the next great Big Data thing happens.
October 20, 2018
GAME CHANGER
Justin Verlander spoke to the media about the scandal of the Astros "spying" on their opponent's dugout. He said the company line about the spy was really trying to see if the Red Sox were cheating.
But he went on to say something about sign stealing and speeding up pace of play. Yahoo Sports quotes the Astro ace from his Thursday press conference:
But he went on to say something about sign stealing and speeding up pace of play. Yahoo Sports quotes the Astro ace from his Thursday press conference:
Given that cameras are everywhere, do you have any ideas how to make the sign stealing stuff go away, whether it’s wireless headsets, the communication —
It’s a good question. You know, honestly, I think something that came up for me in talking about pace of game might also help, which is, like you said, some wireless — you see in the NFL with the quarterback, a way to converse between pitcher and catcher and honestly between manager and catcher. I thought — I brought this issue to MLB last year and thought that for pace of game that could probably save 20 minutes a game.
You think of all the signs everybody’s going through — between pitcher/catcher, manager/catcher, especially when a guy gets on second base, I mean the game comes to a halt when that happens because of all the technology and we know that you need to be aware of it.
But I think that can also help. It’s not going to help pitch tipping, but I think it will help a lot with the sign stuff. And I think — I mean, I think this is a lot to do about nothing. I think it’s more peace of mind for the pitchers. Like I said, especially in the playoffs, you don’t want there to be any lingering doubt of anything. You want the only reason you get beat to be because you got beat. You don’t want to have to think it’s something else. That’s why you’re seeing all these advanced signs.
Yahoo Sports calculated that the wireless signal calling could speed up the average game by 10 minutes.
But this discussion does not really address the REAL problem. The real problem is that managers and coaches are trying to micromanage the game into a video realm. In the past, the pitcher and catcher had their own "books" on how to get players out. They would review their pitching strategy for the entire game. The catcher would not look to the dugout before each pitch. He would put down the sign and the pitcher, the ultimate one in control of the situation, would agree or shake off the sign. A pitcher knows what is working that day; he knows how he feels. He should have the baseball IQ to pitch to the situation.
The NFL having an offensive coordinator calling every play through a headset actually turns the game into a battle of sideline guys. The view from the sideline is not the same from that behind center. The QB is the one who sees the flow of the defense; he can see the matchups at the line of scrimmage. But he is told what to do. He is not supposed to audible. He calls the play and has to get through his check downs quickly before being hit by a defender.
In the past, the quarterback called the plays. Peyton Manning was the last traditional QB in the game. He called all the plays because he was a "coach" on the field. He understood defenses. He understood his players strengths and weaknesses. He could game plan and adapt on the fly. That is why he was a great, winning QB.
If you want to speed up the game AND bring it back to its roots, the pitcher (like an old school QB) should call his own pitches, take command of his own performance and own his own accountability. That would be a real game changer.
October 17, 2017
MADDENING SERIES
As the NLCS returns to Wrigley Field with the tenor of "must win" games, the focus is still on Joe Maddon strange managerial moves. From the time he mule whipped Wade Davis to pitch in three innings in the NLDS finals to putting in a cold John Lackey to hold NLCS Game 2 in the 9th, Maddon has been soundly criticized for his actions.
When the Cubs charter plane had to make an emergency landing because of a player's family member's medical issue, it could have been seen as a bad omen. The players had to sit on the plane for 5 hours because regulations required a crew change. It was a stressful cross country trek to get to LA for Game 1.
The debate for the Game 1 starter was between Quintana, who just pitched in relief, and Lackey who was on the roster as an observer in the NLDS. Considering the weakness and overwork of the bullpen, many people thought Lackey should start Game 1 for the following reasons: 1) he was fresh; 2) Dodgers stadium is a big ball park, a pitcher's park; 3) he has post-season experience; and 4) if he is on the roster, use him. You could get 7 innings out of him and Montgomery to save the bullpen for the series.
But Maddon chose Quintana to start. But it was reported just before the game started that the player's family member stricken on the charter flight was Quintana's wife. They stayed in New Mexico on Friday. And that she was still recovering in LA on Saturday. Why would you summon a player to the mound when there are still serious personal issues on his mind?
In order to set up the rotation on proper rest, Maddon should have had Lackey pitch Game 1 followed by Quintana, Lester, Arrieta and Hendricks.
Quintana pitched 5 innings, keeping the game close. It was the bullpen that let the Dodgers secure the lead. Hector Rondon replaced Justin Wilson on the roster (which was a good move considering Maddon did not trust Wilson in any key situation). Rondon gave up a home run - - - it was a good pitch that was taken deep.
To compound the rotation issue, Maddon called on Lester to pitch Game 2 on short rest. Lester struggled through 4 2/3 innings. Edwards and Strop came in to pitch well. But in the 9th inning, Maddon had Lackey come in to stop a Dodger rally. It was a disaster. Lackey clearly was not ready to come into the game as he wandered around the mound in a five minute time span to pitch to two batters. Normally, a starting pitcher takes at least a half hour to warm up. An older pitcher may take longer to get loose. In Game 2, Lackey was called in the 9th to relieve. It appeared he was not physically or mentally prepared to shut down the Dodgers. He gave up the walk off HR to Turner.
Maddon explained that he did not go to closer Davis in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game because he wanted to save him "for a save situation." He said Davis would only be able to throw an inning so he did not want to use him in a non-save situation. But Maddon's comments shows the flaws in his own logic. The only reason Davis could only throw an inning in Game 2 is that he had been burned out in Game 5 of the NLDS. Maddon was looking ahead for the Cubs to score in the 10th inning to set up a save opportunity. But the Cubs offense was dormant - - - there was no guarantee that the Cubs would bat again. There is a general philosophy in baseball that a visiting team uses its closer in the 9th inning of a tied game because it is a sudden death situation. Maddon did the opposite.
Maddon continues to defy his seasonal decisions. He keeps on putting players in situations which they have never done before in their career, let alone in the regular season. A prime example of this was putting Lackey in Game 2. Lackey had never pitched in back to back games in his entire career. Lackey is not a relief pitcher, let alone taking on a closer's role.
Maddon cornered himself with his post-season pitching decisions because he only had Montgomery and Davis available in the pen for the end of Game 2. Montgomery has experience closing out playoff games (Game 7 of the 2016 WS) but he may have been physically drained to be put into a high pressure 9th. Maddon may have also thought he needed a "long" reliever in extra innings.
On the opposite dugout, Dodgers manager Roberts told reporters that he does not hesitate to take out a starter early in a game. He places his relievers to face certain batters. For example, he said he would make sure that Morrow would face Bryant, Rizzo and Contreras (the 2-3-4 hitters) and not use him for the bottom of the order. By assigning his relievers to where he wants them to pitch before the game starts allows Roberts not to second guess himself.
While the focal point of Maddon's decisions has been pitching, the Cubs hitters are in a terrible slump. They are not taking walks. They are fishing for breaking balls in the dirt. They are deer in the headlights of change ups. But Maddon kept putting in players who are struggling at the plate. He has done two double switches which had Almora, his most consistent batter, taken out of the game. He has also forgotten about playing Happ at any position. And the post-season magic of Schwarber appears to be at its end.
It will take a Cubs home sweep to give the team a remote chance to make it to the World Series. Maddon's moves to date have not helped his team win games.
When the Cubs charter plane had to make an emergency landing because of a player's family member's medical issue, it could have been seen as a bad omen. The players had to sit on the plane for 5 hours because regulations required a crew change. It was a stressful cross country trek to get to LA for Game 1.
The debate for the Game 1 starter was between Quintana, who just pitched in relief, and Lackey who was on the roster as an observer in the NLDS. Considering the weakness and overwork of the bullpen, many people thought Lackey should start Game 1 for the following reasons: 1) he was fresh; 2) Dodgers stadium is a big ball park, a pitcher's park; 3) he has post-season experience; and 4) if he is on the roster, use him. You could get 7 innings out of him and Montgomery to save the bullpen for the series.
But Maddon chose Quintana to start. But it was reported just before the game started that the player's family member stricken on the charter flight was Quintana's wife. They stayed in New Mexico on Friday. And that she was still recovering in LA on Saturday. Why would you summon a player to the mound when there are still serious personal issues on his mind?
In order to set up the rotation on proper rest, Maddon should have had Lackey pitch Game 1 followed by Quintana, Lester, Arrieta and Hendricks.
Quintana pitched 5 innings, keeping the game close. It was the bullpen that let the Dodgers secure the lead. Hector Rondon replaced Justin Wilson on the roster (which was a good move considering Maddon did not trust Wilson in any key situation). Rondon gave up a home run - - - it was a good pitch that was taken deep.
To compound the rotation issue, Maddon called on Lester to pitch Game 2 on short rest. Lester struggled through 4 2/3 innings. Edwards and Strop came in to pitch well. But in the 9th inning, Maddon had Lackey come in to stop a Dodger rally. It was a disaster. Lackey clearly was not ready to come into the game as he wandered around the mound in a five minute time span to pitch to two batters. Normally, a starting pitcher takes at least a half hour to warm up. An older pitcher may take longer to get loose. In Game 2, Lackey was called in the 9th to relieve. It appeared he was not physically or mentally prepared to shut down the Dodgers. He gave up the walk off HR to Turner.
Maddon explained that he did not go to closer Davis in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game because he wanted to save him "for a save situation." He said Davis would only be able to throw an inning so he did not want to use him in a non-save situation. But Maddon's comments shows the flaws in his own logic. The only reason Davis could only throw an inning in Game 2 is that he had been burned out in Game 5 of the NLDS. Maddon was looking ahead for the Cubs to score in the 10th inning to set up a save opportunity. But the Cubs offense was dormant - - - there was no guarantee that the Cubs would bat again. There is a general philosophy in baseball that a visiting team uses its closer in the 9th inning of a tied game because it is a sudden death situation. Maddon did the opposite.
Maddon continues to defy his seasonal decisions. He keeps on putting players in situations which they have never done before in their career, let alone in the regular season. A prime example of this was putting Lackey in Game 2. Lackey had never pitched in back to back games in his entire career. Lackey is not a relief pitcher, let alone taking on a closer's role.
Maddon cornered himself with his post-season pitching decisions because he only had Montgomery and Davis available in the pen for the end of Game 2. Montgomery has experience closing out playoff games (Game 7 of the 2016 WS) but he may have been physically drained to be put into a high pressure 9th. Maddon may have also thought he needed a "long" reliever in extra innings.
On the opposite dugout, Dodgers manager Roberts told reporters that he does not hesitate to take out a starter early in a game. He places his relievers to face certain batters. For example, he said he would make sure that Morrow would face Bryant, Rizzo and Contreras (the 2-3-4 hitters) and not use him for the bottom of the order. By assigning his relievers to where he wants them to pitch before the game starts allows Roberts not to second guess himself.
While the focal point of Maddon's decisions has been pitching, the Cubs hitters are in a terrible slump. They are not taking walks. They are fishing for breaking balls in the dirt. They are deer in the headlights of change ups. But Maddon kept putting in players who are struggling at the plate. He has done two double switches which had Almora, his most consistent batter, taken out of the game. He has also forgotten about playing Happ at any position. And the post-season magic of Schwarber appears to be at its end.
It will take a Cubs home sweep to give the team a remote chance to make it to the World Series. Maddon's moves to date have not helped his team win games.
September 19, 2017
THE MATH
It is crunch time in the NL Central.
Today's standings:
Cubs 83-66
Brewers 80-70 3.5 GB
Cardinals 77-72 6 GB
The Cubs and Cards have 13 games to play; Brewers 12.
The Cubs have a 97.1 percent chance to make the playoffs. The Brewers have 14.8%. The Cardinals only 4.0%.
But what will it take to win the division?
The Brewers are currently on an 8-2 streak. At that pace to the end of the season, the Brewers would win 88 games. So really, the mark to take the crown is 88 wins.
The Cardinals are currently on a 5-5 streak. They would have to win 11 of their last 13 games to reach 88 wins. That is highly unlikely.
The Cubs would have to go 5-8 to reach 88 games.Considering the Cubs have been good in their last ten games (7-3), they should easily reach 88 wins. The Cubs current winning percentage projects 90 wins which means the Brewers would have to win every remaining game to tie the Cubs.
The Cubs appear to be on the cusp of repeating their NL Central championship. The only potential spoiler remains the pesky Brewers.
Today's standings:
Cubs 83-66
Brewers 80-70 3.5 GB
Cardinals 77-72 6 GB
The Cubs and Cards have 13 games to play; Brewers 12.
The Cubs have a 97.1 percent chance to make the playoffs. The Brewers have 14.8%. The Cardinals only 4.0%.
But what will it take to win the division?
The Brewers are currently on an 8-2 streak. At that pace to the end of the season, the Brewers would win 88 games. So really, the mark to take the crown is 88 wins.
The Cardinals are currently on a 5-5 streak. They would have to win 11 of their last 13 games to reach 88 wins. That is highly unlikely.
The Cubs would have to go 5-8 to reach 88 games.Considering the Cubs have been good in their last ten games (7-3), they should easily reach 88 wins. The Cubs current winning percentage projects 90 wins which means the Brewers would have to win every remaining game to tie the Cubs.
The Cubs appear to be on the cusp of repeating their NL Central championship. The only potential spoiler remains the pesky Brewers.
September 1, 2017
DESPERATION?
The Cubs are at a season high 13 games above .500. But the Brewers are still only 3.5 GB.
For the second time this season, the Cubs are messing with Brewers in regard to playing a game.
First, the Cubs called a game for an alleged rain out on a day that it did not rain. It created a
doubleheader disadvantage for Milwaukee.
Now, the Cubs got a "one time exception" to the Friday night home game ban. The reason:
the Cubs are coming home from a night game in Pittsburgh. Well, the team knew that a year ago
and the Cubs set the start times for their home games - - - a year ago.
The Brewers wanted the day game to go on as scheduled. They appealed to the league office.
No action was taken.
The Cubs may be "tired" on the trip home (?) but it is September - - - you can have 40 men on your roster!
Being tired in September is a weak excuse.
You are the defending World Champs. Why pull bush league schedule changes against your closest rival?
Perhaps it is because the Ricketts are so invested in the new infrastructure that they are desperate for
post-season revenue - - - a lot of post season revenue. World Series type revenue.
Attendance has not been max this year. The official seating number is around 42,000 but local business owners think the "real" capacity with standing room and party decks is more like 45,000. The Cubs have drawn 2.6 million in 66 home games (39,393). If the Cubs owners were banking on a full house for a full home schedule, revenue projections have been light by more than $18 million.
For the second time this season, the Cubs are messing with Brewers in regard to playing a game.
First, the Cubs called a game for an alleged rain out on a day that it did not rain. It created a
doubleheader disadvantage for Milwaukee.
Now, the Cubs got a "one time exception" to the Friday night home game ban. The reason:
the Cubs are coming home from a night game in Pittsburgh. Well, the team knew that a year ago
and the Cubs set the start times for their home games - - - a year ago.
The Brewers wanted the day game to go on as scheduled. They appealed to the league office.
No action was taken.
The Cubs may be "tired" on the trip home (?) but it is September - - - you can have 40 men on your roster!
Being tired in September is a weak excuse.
You are the defending World Champs. Why pull bush league schedule changes against your closest rival?
Perhaps it is because the Ricketts are so invested in the new infrastructure that they are desperate for
post-season revenue - - - a lot of post season revenue. World Series type revenue.
Attendance has not been max this year. The official seating number is around 42,000 but local business owners think the "real" capacity with standing room and party decks is more like 45,000. The Cubs have drawn 2.6 million in 66 home games (39,393). If the Cubs owners were banking on a full house for a full home schedule, revenue projections have been light by more than $18 million.
August 24, 2017
5 & 7
Barring an epic collapse, the rule of thumb is that a team can realistically make up one game per week in the standings.
There are approximately 5 weeks left to go in the season.
The Brewers are 3.5 games behind the Cubs. The Cardinals are 4.5 games behind.
The NL Central rivals may be looking more toward a tightening wild card race than a division win.
But the Cubs still have 7 games left with each of the Brewers and Cardinals. That means that the Brewers and Cardinals are not out of the race even if they trail by 7 games before meeting the Cubs.
Another rule of thumb is that a team needs to take care of business in its own division. The only two teams left with an above .500 record are the Brewers and Cardinals. The Cubs still need to play well against division teams in order to avoid a bitter September surprise.
There are approximately 5 weeks left to go in the season.
The Brewers are 3.5 games behind the Cubs. The Cardinals are 4.5 games behind.
The NL Central rivals may be looking more toward a tightening wild card race than a division win.
But the Cubs still have 7 games left with each of the Brewers and Cardinals. That means that the Brewers and Cardinals are not out of the race even if they trail by 7 games before meeting the Cubs.
Another rule of thumb is that a team needs to take care of business in its own division. The only two teams left with an above .500 record are the Brewers and Cardinals. The Cubs still need to play well against division teams in order to avoid a bitter September surprise.
August 19, 2017
THE FUTURE
There has been one constant throughout the history of baseball: owners desire to make a profit.
In order to keep a competitive balance (and profit sharing), MLB has a luxury tax on payrolls currently pegged at $195 million. The penalty for going over the ceiling is 50 percent to 92 percent. This is a soft salary cap where big market teams like the Dodgers and Yankees can easily absorb.
But the future is rapidly changing that overspend model. The Yankees sold most of their interest in the YES Network, which was the cash cow that fueled those free agent filled teams. The Dodgers got a billion dollar team network deal with TW, which turned into a bust when cable operators balked at paying high subscription fees.
The cable industry, the tinder for the rapid rise in profits and player salaries, is losing three million subscribers a quarter. The biggest reason was the surcharge of sports network fees on monthly bills. The second reason was the internet and other means of consuming sports than television sets. The third, and possibly most glaring reason, is that the younger generation is less interested in traditional sports franchises. Young kids are more involved in their technology of video games and e-sports than play baseball in the park. In addition, teams have made it almost cost prohibitive for a family to go attend a major league game.
The outside profit center for many teams, the publicly financed sweetheart ball park deal, like the cable money is going to go extinct. Not one publicly financed sports stadium has created an "economic boom" for the municipality. In fact, the associated debt with those deals can be crippling taxpayers. With more and more cities, counties and states in massive fiscal holes and bankruptcy, the community revolt against such capitalism welfare projects will end.
But on the other side, star players are looking for massive contracts. Bryce Harper nears free agency with agent speculation that he will demand anywhere from $30 million to $50 million per season. ESPN opined that Harper could easily become the first $500 million player in sports history. When baseball franchises are worth at the high tide level of $1.5 billion, a superstar player's demand for a third of the team value makes the business model absurd.
Teams are no longer owned or controlled by millionaires looking to massage their country club egos with sports championships. Most teams are corporations who have to answer to shareholders. Investors demand return on their capital in the form of dividends, earnings and appreciation. The easy cost control item on a team is payroll.
In the near future, baseball as a game will fundamentally change. There are growing calls to eliminate much of the subjective, human element of game by turning ball and strike calls over to computer grid technology. In essence, the game will be played without umpires - - - merely sensors and real time play reviews at the league office. But even the elimination of umpires will not drastically alter the erosion of the economics of the game.
If the next generation of fans accept virtual reality for reality, then baseball will probably forge ahead to create a digital platform to replace the timeless past time. Whether it be 3D or holographic representation of past, present or computer generated players, baseball could morph into super computer super charged video game.
Fans like their fantasy leagues. They like their smart phone apps. If baseball was compressed into a graphic rich, high octane video game, many would watch. The elimination of players, ball parks, infrastructure costs, team travel, etc. is like a dream to a team accountant. If the owners can keep a fan base happy without incurring normal costs, then it is virtual game on.
Since most states have privacy and image rights laws, the new virtual baseball game would probably be run by superstar programmers than old player profiles. Instead of expensive Bryce Harper batting third for the Nationals, it could be RobotOF127. The league could set input parameters for team programmers in setting up algorithms for player stats/performance guides. The league would then run on its own servers simulated games using those team rosters. Whether there would be an real time manager making decisions or strategy calls would be possible. It would also be possible that teams would employ a few gamers to act as pitcher, hitters and fielders to add a "human" element to the simulated game.
Simulated games could be played quicker than real ones. Simulated seasons could be finished rather quickly. Playoff games could be subscription or theater events across the country (or across the globe).
One could argue that this is merely a technological fantasy. That there will always be enough players wanting to play professional sports to field teams. That may be true, but in some sports there is a major shift on whether the health risks outweigh the playing time. More parents are taking their children out of contact football at earlier ages. Even professional players are retiring early because of the current research on the ramifications of concussions. Football could be the first major sport to have a serious personnel shortage. In addition, marketing executives note that in order to capture fans early, those kids need to appreciate the sport, i.e. have played it at some level. That is the fantasy connection between seeing your favorite player juke through the line for a touchdown then going outside to play football with friends.
The same could hold true for baseball. It is a time consuming and expensive spectator sport. The lure of going to the ball park for a game is that it was a social event. There was enough time between pitches to converse with friends. But in this internet age, people are less social. They don't see the need to spend three hours talking to other people at an event. They can poke, text or email them.
All consumption of all forms of entertainment are under fire. Baseball is just one option in this ever changing landscape.
In order to keep a competitive balance (and profit sharing), MLB has a luxury tax on payrolls currently pegged at $195 million. The penalty for going over the ceiling is 50 percent to 92 percent. This is a soft salary cap where big market teams like the Dodgers and Yankees can easily absorb.
But the future is rapidly changing that overspend model. The Yankees sold most of their interest in the YES Network, which was the cash cow that fueled those free agent filled teams. The Dodgers got a billion dollar team network deal with TW, which turned into a bust when cable operators balked at paying high subscription fees.
The cable industry, the tinder for the rapid rise in profits and player salaries, is losing three million subscribers a quarter. The biggest reason was the surcharge of sports network fees on monthly bills. The second reason was the internet and other means of consuming sports than television sets. The third, and possibly most glaring reason, is that the younger generation is less interested in traditional sports franchises. Young kids are more involved in their technology of video games and e-sports than play baseball in the park. In addition, teams have made it almost cost prohibitive for a family to go attend a major league game.
The outside profit center for many teams, the publicly financed sweetheart ball park deal, like the cable money is going to go extinct. Not one publicly financed sports stadium has created an "economic boom" for the municipality. In fact, the associated debt with those deals can be crippling taxpayers. With more and more cities, counties and states in massive fiscal holes and bankruptcy, the community revolt against such capitalism welfare projects will end.
But on the other side, star players are looking for massive contracts. Bryce Harper nears free agency with agent speculation that he will demand anywhere from $30 million to $50 million per season. ESPN opined that Harper could easily become the first $500 million player in sports history. When baseball franchises are worth at the high tide level of $1.5 billion, a superstar player's demand for a third of the team value makes the business model absurd.
Teams are no longer owned or controlled by millionaires looking to massage their country club egos with sports championships. Most teams are corporations who have to answer to shareholders. Investors demand return on their capital in the form of dividends, earnings and appreciation. The easy cost control item on a team is payroll.
In the near future, baseball as a game will fundamentally change. There are growing calls to eliminate much of the subjective, human element of game by turning ball and strike calls over to computer grid technology. In essence, the game will be played without umpires - - - merely sensors and real time play reviews at the league office. But even the elimination of umpires will not drastically alter the erosion of the economics of the game.
If the next generation of fans accept virtual reality for reality, then baseball will probably forge ahead to create a digital platform to replace the timeless past time. Whether it be 3D or holographic representation of past, present or computer generated players, baseball could morph into super computer super charged video game.
Fans like their fantasy leagues. They like their smart phone apps. If baseball was compressed into a graphic rich, high octane video game, many would watch. The elimination of players, ball parks, infrastructure costs, team travel, etc. is like a dream to a team accountant. If the owners can keep a fan base happy without incurring normal costs, then it is virtual game on.
Since most states have privacy and image rights laws, the new virtual baseball game would probably be run by superstar programmers than old player profiles. Instead of expensive Bryce Harper batting third for the Nationals, it could be RobotOF127. The league could set input parameters for team programmers in setting up algorithms for player stats/performance guides. The league would then run on its own servers simulated games using those team rosters. Whether there would be an real time manager making decisions or strategy calls would be possible. It would also be possible that teams would employ a few gamers to act as pitcher, hitters and fielders to add a "human" element to the simulated game.
Simulated games could be played quicker than real ones. Simulated seasons could be finished rather quickly. Playoff games could be subscription or theater events across the country (or across the globe).
One could argue that this is merely a technological fantasy. That there will always be enough players wanting to play professional sports to field teams. That may be true, but in some sports there is a major shift on whether the health risks outweigh the playing time. More parents are taking their children out of contact football at earlier ages. Even professional players are retiring early because of the current research on the ramifications of concussions. Football could be the first major sport to have a serious personnel shortage. In addition, marketing executives note that in order to capture fans early, those kids need to appreciate the sport, i.e. have played it at some level. That is the fantasy connection between seeing your favorite player juke through the line for a touchdown then going outside to play football with friends.
The same could hold true for baseball. It is a time consuming and expensive spectator sport. The lure of going to the ball park for a game is that it was a social event. There was enough time between pitches to converse with friends. But in this internet age, people are less social. They don't see the need to spend three hours talking to other people at an event. They can poke, text or email them.
All consumption of all forms of entertainment are under fire. Baseball is just one option in this ever changing landscape.
September 14, 2015
THE BULLPEN DAY
Joe Maddon decided to "save" Dan Haren for Sunday's game. So he utilized a "bullpen" game for Saturday's contest. The weather was iffy, so he decided not to waste a starter with a potential rain delay. And with another double header up against Pittsburgh, he wanted to keep Arrieta and Lester available for that series. Those are all valid reasons.
But how he went about executing his plan was debatable.
The Cubs have 34 players on the roster, including a stretched out starter in Wada and long reliever in Richard. Either of those two could have started the game and pitch 3 or more innings. But Maddon decided to go with ex-starter Wood, then with Cahill (a former starter). That seemed to work well, until Maddon replaced Cahill with Grimm. Grimm is too much like Cahill. Richard had been warming up, so I thought at the time Richard would have been a better choice (lefty-righty then lefty). Grimm got wild and hammered around and the bullpen could not right the game.
In retrospect, it probably would have been better to start Wada, and if he had rust, then go Wood, Cahill, Richard to get to the back of the pen.
Maybe Maddon was not concerned since the Phils were playing their AAA team for most of the series. But a split series against the Phils feels like a major loss this late in the season. The Giants have now pulled within 7.5 games of the Cubs in the wild card. Plus, the time was to pounce on the struggling Cardinals.
But how he went about executing his plan was debatable.
The Cubs have 34 players on the roster, including a stretched out starter in Wada and long reliever in Richard. Either of those two could have started the game and pitch 3 or more innings. But Maddon decided to go with ex-starter Wood, then with Cahill (a former starter). That seemed to work well, until Maddon replaced Cahill with Grimm. Grimm is too much like Cahill. Richard had been warming up, so I thought at the time Richard would have been a better choice (lefty-righty then lefty). Grimm got wild and hammered around and the bullpen could not right the game.
In retrospect, it probably would have been better to start Wada, and if he had rust, then go Wood, Cahill, Richard to get to the back of the pen.
Maybe Maddon was not concerned since the Phils were playing their AAA team for most of the series. But a split series against the Phils feels like a major loss this late in the season. The Giants have now pulled within 7.5 games of the Cubs in the wild card. Plus, the time was to pounce on the struggling Cardinals.
June 16, 2015
COMPUTER FOLLIES
Computers are supposed to be productivity tools to help humans manage information.
So two stories about computers and MLB twist that purpose.
First, the Royals and their fan base is accused of trying to stuff the ballot to get at least 7 Royals in the All-Star game. Since it is fan voting and a simple log in, with an email, the un(der)employed KC metro area seems to pulling all-nighters to beef up their Royals votes. It has gotten so silly that .200 hitting Omar Infante is the leading in votes for starting second baseman.
It would not matter if the All Star game remained an exhibition contest. But since MLB instituted interleague play, fans across the country can now see on a regular basis other league's best players. It used to be confined to one All Star a year plus the World Series. But the real cause of concern is that stupid Bud Selig salvage attempt of making the winner of the All Star game the home team for the World Series. Selig's folly let the air out of the former value of winning actual regular season games (since the best record always had home field advantage).
Second, the Cardinals alleged cyberhack scandal has more serious ramifications to baseball. It involves several federal crimes, felonies, which have potential jail sentences of 1 to 5 years. It involves corporate spying allegations on another team's proprietary team information (statistical analysis, scouting reports and trade emails). If the information was used by the organization or front office (and not as spun by some in the media as a rogue IT employee seeking revenge or a prank against a former boss), then a conspiracy charge could take out much of management and/or its credibility. The new commissioner is then put under the hot seat. How does the unprecedented criminal theft of team information fit under the "best interests of baseball" clause? If gambling on baseball is still the death sentence offense in the baseball charter (see, Pete Rose), then what could the penalties be to the Cardinals if they were found guilty of spying?
The NFL came down hard on the Patriots for the seemingly mild cheat of deflating footballs. But the NFL was mad that the Patriots were flaunting the rules, authority and integrity of the game on multiple occasions. The real concern is whether the FBI investigation, with subpoena power and computer expertise to track computer files and transmissions, will lead to a scandal bigger than the original intrusion in the Astros computer servers.
It is really a lack of common sense. Every MLB team has their own computer data base programs. There are plenty of public resources like Fangraphs that are spitting out Moneyball statistics and analysis. Why the Cardinals or its employees would benefit from an Astro hack is the great unknown folly in this story.
So two stories about computers and MLB twist that purpose.
First, the Royals and their fan base is accused of trying to stuff the ballot to get at least 7 Royals in the All-Star game. Since it is fan voting and a simple log in, with an email, the un(der)employed KC metro area seems to pulling all-nighters to beef up their Royals votes. It has gotten so silly that .200 hitting Omar Infante is the leading in votes for starting second baseman.
It would not matter if the All Star game remained an exhibition contest. But since MLB instituted interleague play, fans across the country can now see on a regular basis other league's best players. It used to be confined to one All Star a year plus the World Series. But the real cause of concern is that stupid Bud Selig salvage attempt of making the winner of the All Star game the home team for the World Series. Selig's folly let the air out of the former value of winning actual regular season games (since the best record always had home field advantage).
Second, the Cardinals alleged cyberhack scandal has more serious ramifications to baseball. It involves several federal crimes, felonies, which have potential jail sentences of 1 to 5 years. It involves corporate spying allegations on another team's proprietary team information (statistical analysis, scouting reports and trade emails). If the information was used by the organization or front office (and not as spun by some in the media as a rogue IT employee seeking revenge or a prank against a former boss), then a conspiracy charge could take out much of management and/or its credibility. The new commissioner is then put under the hot seat. How does the unprecedented criminal theft of team information fit under the "best interests of baseball" clause? If gambling on baseball is still the death sentence offense in the baseball charter (see, Pete Rose), then what could the penalties be to the Cardinals if they were found guilty of spying?
The NFL came down hard on the Patriots for the seemingly mild cheat of deflating footballs. But the NFL was mad that the Patriots were flaunting the rules, authority and integrity of the game on multiple occasions. The real concern is whether the FBI investigation, with subpoena power and computer expertise to track computer files and transmissions, will lead to a scandal bigger than the original intrusion in the Astros computer servers.
It is really a lack of common sense. Every MLB team has their own computer data base programs. There are plenty of public resources like Fangraphs that are spitting out Moneyball statistics and analysis. Why the Cardinals or its employees would benefit from an Astro hack is the great unknown folly in this story.
April 11, 2015
PACE OF PLAY
SI.com and AP reported that MLB has sent about 10 "slow pace: letters have been sent to players since the season started on Sunday.
The new pace of play rules mandates that hitters keep at least one foot in the batter's box during at-bats, with exceptions such as after foul balls. The batter has until there are five seconds remaining on the clock to enter the batter’s box.
A pitcher is expected to begin throwing to the plate as soon as the batter enters the box and becomes alert to the pitcher. Any batter that doesn't enter the box with five seconds left and any pitcher that doesn't throw a pitch with no time remaining will be in violation of the rule.
Pitchers are also required to start innings before 30 seconds remain on the countdown clocks.
Fines up to $500 per offense will start being handed out to players starting May 1 for those who do not adhere to the new rules.
Last year’s games took an average of three hours and two minutes to complete. Though the first 35 games this season, a nine-inning game is taking 2 hours and 51 minutes to complete.
As discussed for years, MLB is worried about the pace of play as today's youth have a video game attention span of minutes not hours. With batters now wearing body armor to the plate, and constantly adjusting their equipment and gloves after each pitch, something had to be done to get all that wasted time corralled for a better game rhythm. However, there are also a lot of pitchers who scuffle around the rubber, wave off signs and take their sweet time between throws.
Baseball is one of sports where the time between action was a social time for fans in the stands. People would talk about the game, its history, experiences, past events, and predict strategy. But it seems our culture is losing some of the basic conversation and social skills that made baseball the national pasttime.
The new pace of play rules mandates that hitters keep at least one foot in the batter's box during at-bats, with exceptions such as after foul balls. The batter has until there are five seconds remaining on the clock to enter the batter’s box.
A pitcher is expected to begin throwing to the plate as soon as the batter enters the box and becomes alert to the pitcher. Any batter that doesn't enter the box with five seconds left and any pitcher that doesn't throw a pitch with no time remaining will be in violation of the rule.
Pitchers are also required to start innings before 30 seconds remain on the countdown clocks.
Fines up to $500 per offense will start being handed out to players starting May 1 for those who do not adhere to the new rules.
Last year’s games took an average of three hours and two minutes to complete. Though the first 35 games this season, a nine-inning game is taking 2 hours and 51 minutes to complete.
As discussed for years, MLB is worried about the pace of play as today's youth have a video game attention span of minutes not hours. With batters now wearing body armor to the plate, and constantly adjusting their equipment and gloves after each pitch, something had to be done to get all that wasted time corralled for a better game rhythm. However, there are also a lot of pitchers who scuffle around the rubber, wave off signs and take their sweet time between throws.
Baseball is one of sports where the time between action was a social time for fans in the stands. People would talk about the game, its history, experiences, past events, and predict strategy. But it seems our culture is losing some of the basic conversation and social skills that made baseball the national pasttime.
March 24, 2015
MICROSCHEDULING
MLB announced that the last games of the season will all start at the same time.
"If
a game impacts another game, they're all occurring at the same time, so
no team would be put into a lame-duck situation because their fate
already had been decided by an earlier result. If we do have games coming down to the wire, we want to make sure we maximize that day. We're
hopeful that the races will come down to the last day of the season. We
want to make sure we celebrate the end of the season properly."
The reason is that if one team knows the outcome of an earlier contest, it could affect the playoffs (such as resting players or a starting pitcher for the play-in wild card game).
On the positive side, uniformity at the end of season evens the playing field in regard to making teams play the game like a playoff contest. However, if it is a meaningless contest between also-rans the start time of the contest really does not matter. In fact, an early start could hurt the home team's attendance (which could be lagging if they are not in the playoff picture).
It used to be the domain of the home club to schedule the times of their home games. The league creates the schedules, and the teams put in the times, with the exception of getaway days where an afternoon game is held (but not always, as I recall the White Sox having to play a night game on the West Coast then come home to play a day game, which I think was a holiday to get the family crowd) The Sox were upset with their opponent about how they had to play, then fly home for an early game but there was no recourse.
Now, the only other national game changer is the networks who have the right to flex or change telecast times to meet their schedules. They often only give the teams a week's notice or less if there is change. I recall a network moving up a Cub game time by an hour, so the game started with a nearly empty Wrigley until the third inning when fans started to show up at the printed start time on their tickets.
Perhaps the league is slowly trying to micromanage everything. It has its own on-line streaming and network to push content to subscribers.
Looking to add even more
excitement to the race for the postseason, Major League Baseball has
announced a scheduling change they hope will do just that.
Every game on the regular season's final day will start at the same time. The 2015 season ends Sunday, Oct. 4, and first pitch is set for 3 p.m. ET in all 15 games across MLB.
Here's what the league's COO, Tony Pettiti told the LA Times about the decision:
The reason is that if one team knows the outcome of an earlier contest, it could affect the playoffs (such as resting players or a starting pitcher for the play-in wild card game).
On the positive side, uniformity at the end of season evens the playing field in regard to making teams play the game like a playoff contest. However, if it is a meaningless contest between also-rans the start time of the contest really does not matter. In fact, an early start could hurt the home team's attendance (which could be lagging if they are not in the playoff picture).
It used to be the domain of the home club to schedule the times of their home games. The league creates the schedules, and the teams put in the times, with the exception of getaway days where an afternoon game is held (but not always, as I recall the White Sox having to play a night game on the West Coast then come home to play a day game, which I think was a holiday to get the family crowd) The Sox were upset with their opponent about how they had to play, then fly home for an early game but there was no recourse.
Now, the only other national game changer is the networks who have the right to flex or change telecast times to meet their schedules. They often only give the teams a week's notice or less if there is change. I recall a network moving up a Cub game time by an hour, so the game started with a nearly empty Wrigley until the third inning when fans started to show up at the printed start time on their tickets.
Perhaps the league is slowly trying to micromanage everything. It has its own on-line streaming and network to push content to subscribers.
January 7, 2015
BACK TO THE WELL
The Cubs have crawled back to WGN-TV to broadcast the last 45 games of their schedule,
through the 2019 season. The games will not be televised on the WGN America superstation.
The Tribune reports that last season, WGN-Ch. 9 paid about $250,000 per game and lost $200,000 per game because of weak advertising revenue, sources said. The new rights agreement is likely more favorable for WGN and could play out better than last year’s deal, sources said, despite a later start on ad sales.
Launching a regional sports network in 2020 could mean big bucks for the Cubs, who earned about $60 million last season as the team split its schedule between Comcast SportsNet Chicago and WGN-TV.
The loss of 45 games would equate to losing 27 percent of potential local broadcast revenues. Even if the Cubs take substantially less (which WGN had previously offered only a "profit sharing deal" on game telecasts, i.e. meaning nearly nothing based on last season's poor ad sales), it is still better than losing fan interest.
The Cubs need the 45 games broadcast more than WGN needs to show them. People are still creatures of habit; if a fan does not have the opportunity to watch a non-televised Cub game, he or she will find something else to do. And if that something else is just as enjoyable, then he or she may stop watching games on TV in order to experience different forms of entertainment. This is the problem the Dodgers will face in 2015 after 75% of the their local fan base could not watch 2014 Dodger games due to cable operators balking at the Dodgers license fee demands.
If the Cubs are going to launch their own network in 2020, it needs to keep its loyal base in tact and grow the Millennials.
Millennials are defined as the generation of people born between the early 1980s and the early 2000s. Perhaps the most commonly used birth range for this group is 1982-2000. The Millennial Generation is also known as Generation Y, because it comes after Generation X — those people between the early 1960s and the 1980s. It has also been called "the Peter Pan or Boomerang Generation" because of the propensity of some of them to move back in with their parents, perhaps due to economic constraints, and a growing tendency to delay some of the typical adulthood rites of passage like marriage or starting a career.
Millennials have been characterized in a number of different ways. On the negative side, they've been described as lazy, narcissistic and prone to jump from job to job. The 2008 book "Trophy Kids" by Ron Alsop discusses how many young people have been rewarded for minimal accomplishments (such as mere participation) in competitive sports, and have unrealistic expectations of working life.
Time magazine said polls show that this group demands flexible, unrealistic work schedules and more 'me time' on the job, while needing nearly nonstop feedback and career advice from their managers. In the story, "The Me Me Me Generation," it begins: "They’re narcissistic. They’re lazy. They’re coddled. They’re even a bit delusional. Those aren’t just unfounded negative stereotypes about 80 million Americans born roughly between 1980 and 2000. They’re backed up by a decade of sociological research."
A 2012 study found Millennials to be "more civically and politically disengaged, more focused on materialistic values, and less concerned about helping the larger community than were GenX (born 1962-1981) and Baby Boomers (born 1946 to about 1961) at the same ages," USA Today reported. "The trend is more of an emphasis on extrinsic values such as money, fame, and image, and less emphasis on intrinsic values such as self-acceptance, group affiliation and community." The study was based on an analysis of two large databases of 9 million high school seniors or entering college students.
They have also been described in positive ways. They are generally regarded as being more open-minded, and more supportive of gay rights and equal rights for minorities. Other positives adjectives to describe them include confident, self-expressive, liberal, upbeat and receptive to new ideas and ways of living.
The next generation fan base is going to be a tough sell for traditional sports leagues. They do not crave escapism through sports fanaticism, since they view the world already revolving around themselves.
They may be more adapt at new technology and how to consume new forms of entertainment like short YouTube video content created by their peers, or streaming web shows on demand. Whether they have the patience to sit and watch a three hour baseball game is suspect.
through the 2019 season. The games will not be televised on the WGN America superstation.
The Tribune reports that last season, WGN-Ch. 9 paid about $250,000 per game and lost $200,000 per game because of weak advertising revenue, sources said. The new rights agreement is likely more favorable for WGN and could play out better than last year’s deal, sources said, despite a later start on ad sales.
Launching a regional sports network in 2020 could mean big bucks for the Cubs, who earned about $60 million last season as the team split its schedule between Comcast SportsNet Chicago and WGN-TV.
The loss of 45 games would equate to losing 27 percent of potential local broadcast revenues. Even if the Cubs take substantially less (which WGN had previously offered only a "profit sharing deal" on game telecasts, i.e. meaning nearly nothing based on last season's poor ad sales), it is still better than losing fan interest.
The Cubs need the 45 games broadcast more than WGN needs to show them. People are still creatures of habit; if a fan does not have the opportunity to watch a non-televised Cub game, he or she will find something else to do. And if that something else is just as enjoyable, then he or she may stop watching games on TV in order to experience different forms of entertainment. This is the problem the Dodgers will face in 2015 after 75% of the their local fan base could not watch 2014 Dodger games due to cable operators balking at the Dodgers license fee demands.
If the Cubs are going to launch their own network in 2020, it needs to keep its loyal base in tact and grow the Millennials.
Millennials are defined as the generation of people born between the early 1980s and the early 2000s. Perhaps the most commonly used birth range for this group is 1982-2000. The Millennial Generation is also known as Generation Y, because it comes after Generation X — those people between the early 1960s and the 1980s. It has also been called "the Peter Pan or Boomerang Generation" because of the propensity of some of them to move back in with their parents, perhaps due to economic constraints, and a growing tendency to delay some of the typical adulthood rites of passage like marriage or starting a career.
Millennials have been characterized in a number of different ways. On the negative side, they've been described as lazy, narcissistic and prone to jump from job to job. The 2008 book "Trophy Kids" by Ron Alsop discusses how many young people have been rewarded for minimal accomplishments (such as mere participation) in competitive sports, and have unrealistic expectations of working life.
Time magazine said polls show that this group demands flexible, unrealistic work schedules and more 'me time' on the job, while needing nearly nonstop feedback and career advice from their managers. In the story, "The Me Me Me Generation," it begins: "They’re narcissistic. They’re lazy. They’re coddled. They’re even a bit delusional. Those aren’t just unfounded negative stereotypes about 80 million Americans born roughly between 1980 and 2000. They’re backed up by a decade of sociological research."
A 2012 study found Millennials to be "more civically and politically disengaged, more focused on materialistic values, and less concerned about helping the larger community than were GenX (born 1962-1981) and Baby Boomers (born 1946 to about 1961) at the same ages," USA Today reported. "The trend is more of an emphasis on extrinsic values such as money, fame, and image, and less emphasis on intrinsic values such as self-acceptance, group affiliation and community." The study was based on an analysis of two large databases of 9 million high school seniors or entering college students.
They have also been described in positive ways. They are generally regarded as being more open-minded, and more supportive of gay rights and equal rights for minorities. Other positives adjectives to describe them include confident, self-expressive, liberal, upbeat and receptive to new ideas and ways of living.
The next generation fan base is going to be a tough sell for traditional sports leagues. They do not crave escapism through sports fanaticism, since they view the world already revolving around themselves.
They may be more adapt at new technology and how to consume new forms of entertainment like short YouTube video content created by their peers, or streaming web shows on demand. Whether they have the patience to sit and watch a three hour baseball game is suspect.
September 27, 2014
PACE
In the short attention span world in which we live, MLB has decided that it needs to re-vamp the game in order to keep younger, more connected (and easily distracted) fans.
Of course, that misses the entire point of baseball.
Commissioner Bud Selig announced that he has formed a committee to investigate and recommend ways to improve the pace of the game. More and more games are lasting 3.5 hours or longer. Adding replay review does not help the situation.
All baseball needs to do is re-watch the Little League World Series to see how baseball can be a swift and enjoyable contest. Here are some things the little guys can teach the committee of baseball overlords:
1. Once a batter gets in the box, he has to stay in the box for the entire at bat. No stepping out to prine and adjust equipment. The only time the batter can leave the box is with umpire permission. Otherwise, the ball in the pitcher's hand is live.
2. Let the pitcher and catcher call the game. Several major league pitchers who work quickly, like Mark Buerhle, find a good tempo and rhythm to their game. A pitcher and catcher should know their game plan on how to pitch batters before the game starts. Many veteran pitchers cringe on the fact that some manager or pitching coach is calling "their" game and that the pitcher gets whacked with the consequences.
3. If a pitcher is taking too much time on the mound between pitches, warn him about "delay of game." In the LLWS, pitchers got the ball back, looked at the catcher, and got into their wind up in less than 10 seconds. Major leaguers take triple that time. You can shave an hour off a game if the pitchers just get the sign and wind up in less than 15 seconds.
Traditionalists believe that baseball's greatest strength is that it has no clock. The game can last as long as it takes. This allows baseball to be both a spectator and social sport, as fans in the stands have the opportunity to converse, predict and analyze each and every play. But those fans will still appreciate a pitcher who gets into a fast tempo (especially since this probably improves control since a pitcher has less time to "think" about his pitch and its mechanics.)
Of course, that misses the entire point of baseball.
Commissioner Bud Selig announced that he has formed a committee to investigate and recommend ways to improve the pace of the game. More and more games are lasting 3.5 hours or longer. Adding replay review does not help the situation.
All baseball needs to do is re-watch the Little League World Series to see how baseball can be a swift and enjoyable contest. Here are some things the little guys can teach the committee of baseball overlords:
1. Once a batter gets in the box, he has to stay in the box for the entire at bat. No stepping out to prine and adjust equipment. The only time the batter can leave the box is with umpire permission. Otherwise, the ball in the pitcher's hand is live.
2. Let the pitcher and catcher call the game. Several major league pitchers who work quickly, like Mark Buerhle, find a good tempo and rhythm to their game. A pitcher and catcher should know their game plan on how to pitch batters before the game starts. Many veteran pitchers cringe on the fact that some manager or pitching coach is calling "their" game and that the pitcher gets whacked with the consequences.
3. If a pitcher is taking too much time on the mound between pitches, warn him about "delay of game." In the LLWS, pitchers got the ball back, looked at the catcher, and got into their wind up in less than 10 seconds. Major leaguers take triple that time. You can shave an hour off a game if the pitchers just get the sign and wind up in less than 15 seconds.
Traditionalists believe that baseball's greatest strength is that it has no clock. The game can last as long as it takes. This allows baseball to be both a spectator and social sport, as fans in the stands have the opportunity to converse, predict and analyze each and every play. But those fans will still appreciate a pitcher who gets into a fast tempo (especially since this probably improves control since a pitcher has less time to "think" about his pitch and its mechanics.)
June 30, 2014
DEPRESSING
It was the first time since 1932 that the Cubs did not play on a Sunday.
It was more important that the Lakeview Pride Parade take center stage on Sunday than a Cubs-Nationals game.
The Cubs played a day-night doubleheader, meaning the park was cleared for a separate gate for the nigh contest. The Cubs were rewarded for their day off by first losing both games on Saturday.
It was said that there really was no good reason why the Cubs could not play on Sunday. The Cubs gate would be under 30,000. The parade was going to start more than an hour before typical game time. The Cubs could have moved the start time back to 2:20 p.m. if there truly was a traffic concern.
But the decision was made not to play ball.
Then an interesting thing happened: no one noticed that the Cubs did not play yesterday.
The Cubs totally fell off the radar.
The Sunday Cubs used to be a staple program on WGN America, but now that channel has dropped the Cubs from any future national exposure. So the Cubs will further fall off the radar of many non-local Cubs fans.
One could imagine that in the middle of the depression, people could not afford to go to a Cub game. But this is 2014. We are in the final golden years of the Bud Selig leadership era. Baseball has never been better (except on the North Side.)
It is depressing that the Cubs are getting more and more irrelevant.
It was more important that the Lakeview Pride Parade take center stage on Sunday than a Cubs-Nationals game.
The Cubs played a day-night doubleheader, meaning the park was cleared for a separate gate for the nigh contest. The Cubs were rewarded for their day off by first losing both games on Saturday.
It was said that there really was no good reason why the Cubs could not play on Sunday. The Cubs gate would be under 30,000. The parade was going to start more than an hour before typical game time. The Cubs could have moved the start time back to 2:20 p.m. if there truly was a traffic concern.
But the decision was made not to play ball.
Then an interesting thing happened: no one noticed that the Cubs did not play yesterday.
The Cubs totally fell off the radar.
The Sunday Cubs used to be a staple program on WGN America, but now that channel has dropped the Cubs from any future national exposure. So the Cubs will further fall off the radar of many non-local Cubs fans.
One could imagine that in the middle of the depression, people could not afford to go to a Cub game. But this is 2014. We are in the final golden years of the Bud Selig leadership era. Baseball has never been better (except on the North Side.)
It is depressing that the Cubs are getting more and more irrelevant.
April 9, 2014
A BAD SOLUTION
ESPN's Buster Olney reported that at least one MLB executive has proposed a radical solution to a mild problem. Olney's source stated that the game should be changed to seven (7) innings.
It would sure solve the 8th and 9th inning closer problems for many clubs.
But it really makes no sense.
Here are the issues MLB is stewing about:
1. The games are too long in duration. Most games now run more than three hours.
2. MLB is having trouble attracting young fans. The next generation has a perceived shorter attention span.
3. Teams are struggling with injuries, especially with pitchers.
First, the broadcasters would probably like to block out two and half hour blocks on a consistent basis to throw in another syndicated program with possibly more advertising profitability in some markets. However, baseball prides itself on being a historical game - - - which has not changed its basic format in more than 125 years. In that way, people can make player comparisons between eras. A 9 inning game is the standard for all pitching and hitting records.
Second, a study last year indicated that in a three hour game, there is only about 18 minutes of actual "action" on the playing field. If someone wants to speed the game along, batters should not step out after every pitch and/or pitchers should actually throw the next pitch within a few seconds. The expanded use of replay will add several minutes to every game. But, for a fan in the stands, baseball is a "social" game where you sit with friends with the ability to converse between the action. The next generation may have a problem with such basic social skills as conversation, but that is hardly a reason to upend an entire sports legacy.
Third, the specialization of the game is actually hurting the contest. Old school players from even the 1960s and 1970s were expected to start and finish each game, especially the pitchers. Hall of Fame caliber pitchers like Nolan Ryan or Fergie Jenkins expected to throw complete games. Many teams only had four man rotations and limited bullpen arms. But the game got caught up with the numbers of pitches, pitch counts, wear-and-tear on arm strength to morph into a controlled restriction of pitchers ability to pitch complete games. The advent of the bullpen specialist, from the long reliever to the lefty strike out guy, to the set up man and closer put starters on the course to pitch 100 tosses or 5 or 6 innings a start. The amount of pitching changes also slows down the game. Despite all the metrics to keep pitchers healthy, there is no clear evidence that pitching less actually helps.
On the flip side, many owners would want their fans to stay in the ball park as long as possible to purchase merchandise and high-priced concessions. Modern ball parks open the gates earlier or have upscale restaurants to draw fans in both pre-game and post-game. For most fans going to a game, they have already made the decision to make "a day of it." So, MLB focus on time of game is more to do with their network partners than ball park fans. But many clubs have learned recently that there is more money to be made in broadcasting than in attendance.
A seven inning game would have great ramifications on the sport. It would reduce the innings by 22.2 percent. It would reduce the amount of plate appearances by each player by at least 22.2 percent. With less innings to play, there will be a lesser need for 25 players on the roster. One could easily see a team wanting to save money by cutting a bullpen arm and a bench player to have a 23 man roster for the season. There would be less opportunity for scoring (home runs, triples, etc.). The average starting fielder may not even reach 500 AB in a season. All of the historic records would become meaningless in any comparison arguments. Baseball would effectively close its books on the past.
The bottom line is that money will make the final decision. If MLB and owners believe it is in their best profitable interest to shorten the game to seven innings, it will be done. But it would seem that decision would be the ultimate Hail Mary pass.
It would sure solve the 8th and 9th inning closer problems for many clubs.
But it really makes no sense.
Here are the issues MLB is stewing about:
1. The games are too long in duration. Most games now run more than three hours.
2. MLB is having trouble attracting young fans. The next generation has a perceived shorter attention span.
3. Teams are struggling with injuries, especially with pitchers.
First, the broadcasters would probably like to block out two and half hour blocks on a consistent basis to throw in another syndicated program with possibly more advertising profitability in some markets. However, baseball prides itself on being a historical game - - - which has not changed its basic format in more than 125 years. In that way, people can make player comparisons between eras. A 9 inning game is the standard for all pitching and hitting records.
Second, a study last year indicated that in a three hour game, there is only about 18 minutes of actual "action" on the playing field. If someone wants to speed the game along, batters should not step out after every pitch and/or pitchers should actually throw the next pitch within a few seconds. The expanded use of replay will add several minutes to every game. But, for a fan in the stands, baseball is a "social" game where you sit with friends with the ability to converse between the action. The next generation may have a problem with such basic social skills as conversation, but that is hardly a reason to upend an entire sports legacy.
Third, the specialization of the game is actually hurting the contest. Old school players from even the 1960s and 1970s were expected to start and finish each game, especially the pitchers. Hall of Fame caliber pitchers like Nolan Ryan or Fergie Jenkins expected to throw complete games. Many teams only had four man rotations and limited bullpen arms. But the game got caught up with the numbers of pitches, pitch counts, wear-and-tear on arm strength to morph into a controlled restriction of pitchers ability to pitch complete games. The advent of the bullpen specialist, from the long reliever to the lefty strike out guy, to the set up man and closer put starters on the course to pitch 100 tosses or 5 or 6 innings a start. The amount of pitching changes also slows down the game. Despite all the metrics to keep pitchers healthy, there is no clear evidence that pitching less actually helps.
On the flip side, many owners would want their fans to stay in the ball park as long as possible to purchase merchandise and high-priced concessions. Modern ball parks open the gates earlier or have upscale restaurants to draw fans in both pre-game and post-game. For most fans going to a game, they have already made the decision to make "a day of it." So, MLB focus on time of game is more to do with their network partners than ball park fans. But many clubs have learned recently that there is more money to be made in broadcasting than in attendance.
A seven inning game would have great ramifications on the sport. It would reduce the innings by 22.2 percent. It would reduce the amount of plate appearances by each player by at least 22.2 percent. With less innings to play, there will be a lesser need for 25 players on the roster. One could easily see a team wanting to save money by cutting a bullpen arm and a bench player to have a 23 man roster for the season. There would be less opportunity for scoring (home runs, triples, etc.). The average starting fielder may not even reach 500 AB in a season. All of the historic records would become meaningless in any comparison arguments. Baseball would effectively close its books on the past.
The bottom line is that money will make the final decision. If MLB and owners believe it is in their best profitable interest to shorten the game to seven innings, it will be done. But it would seem that decision would be the ultimate Hail Mary pass.
November 15, 2013
May 6, 2013
BASEBALL IS FAILURE
It has been said that the baseball is a game of failure. Even the best hitters in the game only get base hits one third of the time. It is how players and teams react and adjust to these failures which leads to success. Most managers will say after a tough loss that the players have to put that game behind them. The focus is on the game at hand not in the rear view mirror.
But baseball is also a game of repetition. Bad habits are hard to break. Mental depression over poor outings spill over into the next appearance. Some batters in a slump try too hard. It turns into a growing cascade of failure.
The Cubs seem to be in a waterfall of doubt. The team has lost five of the last six games. At 11-20, the Cubs are 9 games out of first place after a month of the season.
As beat writer Bruce Miles pointed out in the Daily Herald:
Former closer Carlos Marmol is now routinely booed by fans. Marmol is 2-2, 2 saves, 5.68 ERA, 1.816 WHIP
Expensive free agent starter Edwin Jackson now sports a record of 0-5 with a 6.39 ERA. Only 2 of Jackson's 7 starts have been quality starts.
Dale Sveum's last season's MVP, reliever Shawn Camp, has been as ineffective as Marmol. Camp gave up 2 runs and 2 hits in 1 inning Sunday. He has an ERA of 8.03 and a WHIP of 1.86 as he has allowed 18 hits and 5 walks in 121⁄3 innings. "He's really having a hard time getting anybody out right now," the manager said. "His stuff is flat, and nothing's really real crisp right now at all with him."
The offense was 2-for-12 with runners in scoring position, making it 44-for-243 (.181) on the season.
Second baseman Darwin Barney was 0-for-4, as his batting average fell to .159. Barney is not the only problem on offense, but he left five runners on to end three innings. On the home stand, he's 3-for-21.
"It's not fun coming up in big situations and not coming through," Barney said. "When you've got guys with runners in scoring position, things just aren't falling. I put some good swings on balls in those situations and they end up right at guys. But other than that, I just haven't been executing my plan very much."
So the batters are pressing and the pitchers are throwing flat. There is a snowball effect of failure happening to the Cubs. There is not one area of play that the team can say with certainty that can right their listing ship. The Cubs defense is spotty; the Cubs hitting is poor; the Cubs pitching and bullpen is suspect; and overall team baseball IQ is stuck in neutral.
UPDATE: Cubs pitching coach Chris Bosio confirms this hypothesis.
But baseball is also a game of repetition. Bad habits are hard to break. Mental depression over poor outings spill over into the next appearance. Some batters in a slump try too hard. It turns into a growing cascade of failure.
The Cubs seem to be in a waterfall of doubt. The team has lost five of the last six games. At 11-20, the Cubs are 9 games out of first place after a month of the season.
As beat writer Bruce Miles pointed out in the Daily Herald:
Former closer Carlos Marmol is now routinely booed by fans. Marmol is 2-2, 2 saves, 5.68 ERA, 1.816 WHIP
Expensive free agent starter Edwin Jackson now sports a record of 0-5 with a 6.39 ERA. Only 2 of Jackson's 7 starts have been quality starts.
Dale Sveum's last season's MVP, reliever Shawn Camp, has been as ineffective as Marmol. Camp gave up 2 runs and 2 hits in 1 inning Sunday. He has an ERA of 8.03 and a WHIP of 1.86 as he has allowed 18 hits and 5 walks in 121⁄3 innings. "He's really having a hard time getting anybody out right now," the manager said. "His stuff is flat, and nothing's really real crisp right now at all with him."
The offense was 2-for-12 with runners in scoring position, making it 44-for-243 (.181) on the season.
Second baseman Darwin Barney was 0-for-4, as his batting average fell to .159. Barney is not the only problem on offense, but he left five runners on to end three innings. On the home stand, he's 3-for-21.
"It's not fun coming up in big situations and not coming through," Barney said. "When you've got guys with runners in scoring position, things just aren't falling. I put some good swings on balls in those situations and they end up right at guys. But other than that, I just haven't been executing my plan very much."
So the batters are pressing and the pitchers are throwing flat. There is a snowball effect of failure happening to the Cubs. There is not one area of play that the team can say with certainty that can right their listing ship. The Cubs defense is spotty; the Cubs hitting is poor; the Cubs pitching and bullpen is suspect; and overall team baseball IQ is stuck in neutral.
UPDATE: Cubs pitching coach Chris Bosio confirms this hypothesis.
He said Marmol is rushing his
delivery and at times “trying too hard,” Bosio
said Sunday in a Sun-Times article. “The biggest thing for Carlos is his concentration
[on] executing the pitch” Bosio said. “I think where Carlos gets in
trouble — along with the rest of the guys — is when they get going too
fast. [Saturday] was a classic case of that."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)