Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

[NYJets]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Indian, Twins, Padres, Brewers, Jays have no shot.

Giants and Dodgers do only due to the sadness of the NL West. Mets payroll is skyhigh, they are 1 of 3 teams in the league that can spend at will.

Indians, Twins, and Jays have no shot??? They all at least have a shot at the wildcard.

[bkrich83]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Indians, Twins, and Jays have no shot??? They all at least have a shot at the wildcard.

Doubtful at best. The Red Sox or the Yankees would have to miss the playoffs.

Again it's easy to tout competetive balance when you are a Yankee fan.

[deeman11747]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Indian, Twins, Padres, Brewers, Jays have no shot.

Giants and Dodgers do only due to the sadness of the NL West. Mets payroll is skyhigh, they are 1 of 3 teams in the league that can spend at will.

Your insane! The Indians have no shot? Some experts are picking them to win the WS. Twins hav a great chance at the WC.

We're not discussing whether or not teams are good compared to the rest of the league (your comment on the Giants and Dodgers). We're talking about which teams have shot to make the playoffs... and yes.. within the context of the NL West.. the Giants and Dodgers (and Padres) all have god shots of winning that divison and making the playoffs.


And if you read my post... I said there needs to be a salary cap but competetive baloance isnt as bad as people such as you make it out to be... and my post with the playoff teams shouldve proved that.

[deeman11747]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Doubtful at best. The Red Sox or the Yankees would have to miss the playoffs.

Again it's easy to tout competetive balance when you are a Yankee fan.

You addressed the Jays... how about the Indians or Twins? Or since you saw the White Sox won the WS last year do you automatically assume they'll win the division easily? If youve been following any basebal related talks lately... a lot of people have the White Sox 3rd this year.

[NYJets]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Mets payroll is skyhigh, they are 1 of 3 teams in the league that can spend at will.

Exactly. There are 3 teams with a huge advantage over the others.

Last time I checked there are 8 playoff spots, and only one of those teams has won a championship the last 5 years. So saying 80% of the league has no chance makes no sense.

The payroll disparity has gotten a lot closer between the other teams the last few years.

[bkrich83]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Your insane! The Indians have no shot? Some experts are picking them to win the WS. Twins hav a great chance at the WC.

We're not discussing whether or not teams are good compared to the rest of the league (your comment on the Giants and Dodgers). We're talking about which teams have shot to make the playoffs... and yes.. within the context of the NL West.. the Giants and Dodgers (and Padres) all have god shots of winning that divison and making the playoffs.


And if you read my post... I said there needs to be a salary cap but competetive baloance isnt as bad as people such as you make it out to be... and my post with the playoff teams shouldve proved that.

Don't buy it. Every year there's vogue picks like the Indians because they have been bad so for so long. This shouldn't even be an argument. There is no competive balance. As I said, if your a Yankee fan or a Red Sox fan, it's easy to say it's there. But it isn't and everyone knows it.

[NYJets]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Doubtful at best. The Red Sox or the Yankees would have to miss the playoffs.

Again it's easy to tout competetive balance when you are a Yankee fan.

Last years standings:
Yankees 95-67
Red Sox 95-67
Indians 93-69

Indians had a shot going into the last series of the season last year.

[bkrich83]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

You addressed the Jays... how about the Indians or Twins? Or since you saw the White Sox won the WS last year do you automatically assume they'll win the division easily? If youve been following any basebal related talks lately... a lot of people have the White Sox 3rd this year.

A lot of people say a lot of things before the season mostly to fill air time or sell magazines. . But lets face it, the Indians aren't going to be in the postseason.

[bkrich83]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Last years standings:
Yankees 95-67
Red Sox 95-67
Indians 93-69

Indians had a shot going into the last series of the season last year.

They made their run and still came up short.

I can not believe anyone in their right mind would think baseball is on an even playing field.

[Vince]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Baseball's competitive balance has nothing to do with the game's struture or there not being a cap.

I think it's more a tribute to the randomness of the baseball season's we've had the past few years. I guess maybe the revenue sharing has helped a bit. And you're also seeing more of an emphasis on teams building teams through the minor leagues and GM's making smart trades.

[deeman11747]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Don't buy it. Every year there's vogue picks like the Indians because they have been bad so for so long. This shouldn't even be an argument. There is no competive balance. As I said, if your a Yankee fan or a Red Sox fan, it's easy to say it's there. But it isn't and everyone knows it.

Bad for so long?

They've continually improved over the last several seasons to the point where they just missed the playoffs last year.

2003: 68-94
2004: 80-82
2005: 93-69

V. Martinez is emerging as a star as is Peralta. The staff is young and improving as well.


And what do you mean.. "and everyone knows it"? Most of the people in this thread agreed with the premise of the article. But I guess its easy to blame our opinions on the fact that we root for a rich team.

[deeman11747]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

They made their run and still came up short.

I can not believe anyone in their right mind would think baseball is on an even playing field.

No ones saying its on an even playing field. We're just saying that the field isnt as unbalanced as people as yourself like to say it is just because there's no cap when theres clear evidence that theres a ton of parity in the game.

[bkrich83]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Baseball's competitive balance has nothing to do with the game's struture or there not being a cap.

I think it's more a tribute to the randomness of the baseball season's we've had the past few years. I guess maybe the revenue sharing has helped a bit. And you're also seeing more of an emphasis on teams building teams through the minor leagues and GM's making smart trades.

There have been some small market teams who put that year together where they get a bunch of players who have career years and they make a run. But they have no chance to either re-sign their big name players when their contracts become due and then those teams aren't heard from again. Only those top few teams money wise can afford to sign players at will and contend year after year. yeah that's competetive balance.

Again easy to say it's even when you are a Yankee fan.

[deeman11747]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

There have been some small market teams who put that year together where they get a bunch of players who have career years and they make a run. But they have no chance to either re-sign their big name players when their contracts become due and then those teams aren't heard from again. Only those top few teams money wise can afford to sign players at will and contend year after year. yeah that's competetive balance.

Again easy to say it's even when you are a Yankee fan.

Teams with smart GMs have shown that a high payroll is not essential for success. Beane, Ryan, Scherhoulz, all put togther teams with minimal money and have continued success.

Once again... no ones questioning whether teams with more mkoney have an advantage over the poorer teams. Its just that the effect is able to be and has been over come in years past and will continue to do so in the years ahead.

Again easy to say it's even when you are a Yankee fan

Maybe if you repeat that in every post it'll finally become true.

[bkrich83]

Re: Baseball doesn't have competitve balance?

Teams with smart GMs have shown that a high payroll is not essential for success. Beane, Ryan, Scherhoulz, all put togther teams with minimal money and have continued success.

Once again... no ones questioning whether teams with more mkoney have an advantage over the poorer teams. Its just that the effect is able to be and has been over come in years past and will continue to do so in the years ahead.



Maybe if you repeat that in every post it'll finally become true.

Don't have to. It's already true. No one answered. You think it's a coincidence the only people in this thread that think balance is there are Yankee and Red Sox fans?