Script: /SportsinaCan/blog/cat/major_league_baseball
Owner:
Subdir: sportsinacan
    Veteran

    Guaranteeing Pennant Races Every Year

    Thursday, September 24, 2009, 11:12 PM EST [Major League Baseball]

    Yankees-Red Sox. Just 5½ games separating them in the race for the AL East title. A huge weekend series to decide playoff positioning. And yet...it really doesn't matter, does it? The Yankees are in the playoffs, the Red Sox are 3 wins away from joining them, and since 7 Wild Card teams have advanced to the World Series in the last 7 years (with 3 of them winning it all), there's really no incentive to try and win the division, is there?

    And therein lies baseball's problem (one of them anyway). In a season seriously lacking pennant races--the Tigers' 3-game lead over the Twins is the tightest race--the regular season limps along to the finish line.

    But what if we could guarantee--that's right, guarantee--pennant races every season? Impossible, you say? Read on, doubting Thomas.

    I have been detailing ways to "build a better baseball" for years. In Part I, I tackled real revenue sharing, shortening the game, adjusting the schedule, and making the first round series best 4-out-of-7. In Part II, I talked about fixing interleague play and eliminating the DH. And in a brief Part III, I suggested that Major League Baseball add a second Wild Card team from each league and have each set of two Wild Card teams face off in a one-game playoff. You want excitement? How about two guaranteed win-or-go-home games every season? You want teams battling for the division crown? How about the reward of one fewer game and saving your ace pitcher for Game 1 of the playoffs instead of wasting him in a one-game playoff.

    Logistically, this is easy to pull off. The Wild Card team with the better record would host the other Wild Card team the day after the season ends. The winner moves on to face the team with the best record in the league (can we do away with the "Wild Card team can't play a team from its own division" rule while we're at it?). Peter Gammons just suggested adding two Wild Card teams last week but he wanted a 2-out-of-3 series for the Wild Card entries. I say one and done. You win you move on. You lose, you go home. One day, that's all we need.

    Think about where things would stand this season. As mentioned above, the Yankees and Red Sox would face off this weekend with the division title in the balance. Meanwhile, the Rangers would be trying to nail down the 2nd Wild Card spot ahead of the Twins and Mariners (both 4 back). In the National League, we'd have a 5-team race for the two Wild Card spots.

    What do we do about ties for the Wild Card or 2 or 3 teams tying for that second Wild Card spot, you ask? We use tiebreakers. Head-to-head and then league records. I'm not advocating multiple games to whittle down the playoff teams. Although if two teams tie for a division title, they would still play a one-game playoff. And if the loser is involved in the Wild Card hunt then they have to suit up for two straight days.

    This simple change would invigorate the end of a season (such as this one) that lacks playoff race drama. It would make teams change their attitudes about "getting ready for the playoffs." You can rest assured every division leader would be fighting to the finish to ensure that they didn't have to play in a one-game playoff. It would also add potential playoff excitement to at least 2 other cities. Instead of watching the Rangers play out the string, Texas fans could be cheering their team toward a playoff date with the Red Sox and dreaming about an upset.

    Instead of looking past the final 10 days of the season and waiting for the playoffs to start, there would still be plenty of meaningful games on the schedule. And baseball's end of the season wouldn't be lost amidst the NFL and college football seasons.

    -----------------------------------------------------
    NFL Week 3 Picks

    Atlanta (+4) over NEW ENGLAND
    BALTIMORE (-13) over Cleveland
    Green Bay (-6½) over ST. LOUIS
    HOUSTON (-3½) over Jacksonville
    PHILADELPHIA (-8½) over Kansas City
    NY Giants (-6½) over TAMPA BAY
    MINNESOTA (-6½) over San Francisco
    Tennessee (+3) over NY JETS
    Washington (-6½) over DETROIT
    Chicago (-2) over SEATTLE
    New Orleans (-6) over BUFFALO
    OAKLAND (+2) over Denver
    SAN DIEGO (-6) over Miami
    CINCINNATI (+4½) over Pittsburgh
    Indianapolis (+2½) over ARIZONA
    DALLAS (-8½) over Carolina

    Last week: 7-9
    Season: 14-18

    2.8 (1 Ratings)

    Building a Better Baseball (Part 2)

    Wednesday, December 21, 2005, 09:52 AM EST [Major League Baseball]

    Part 2 of 2 (Check out the archive for Part 1)

    A few more ideas to fix the National Pastime...

    Eliminate the DH

    That's right, eliminate it. Abolish it. Eradicate it. Pretend it never existed. I can hear DH apologists around the country going crazy over this one (as well as David Ortiz). But really now. There are two sets of rules for the two leagues. Is this any way to live? The NBA equivalent would be allowing the Eastern Conference to play zone but the West could only play man-to-man. Does that make any sense?

    Why get rid of it? Because it is unnecessary. The DH was added in the early '70s when scoring was down in baseball. Well, those days are over. Plus, the National League game has a lot more strategy than does the American League game. When do you pinch hit for the pitcher? Do you double switch? What do American League managers have to worry about (besides what's for dinner after the game)?

    How many potential two-position superstars have we missed out on over the years because pitchers are taught from an early age that they don't need to focus on hitting? Most of the really good high school pitchers are also the best hitters and athletes on their teams. Do they just forget how to hit between high school and the Majors? Do they lose their athleticism? No, they just don't work on hitting and fielding anymore, because why bother?

    And as an added bonus on this one-I'll even throw in a little advice to Major League Baseball about how to get rid of the DH. In the next collective bargaining session, make a deal with the players that five years down the road the DH will be eliminated but an extra roster spot per team will be created. This would give most (or all) of the current DHs time either to get too old to play anymore or to find a position to play, and it would add 30 more dues-paying members to the union. Commissioner Selig: please give me a call. I'm here to help.

    Fix Interleague play

    Some people want to get rid of interleague play entirely. I kind of like it. But I'm a little tired of games such as Yankees-Mets. Not the games themselves, mind you. But the pomp and circumstance lipstick that FOX and Major League Baseball keeps trying to paint on this pig.

    People liked interleague play because it was new and different. And because they got to see teams they had never seen before. But this whole "natural rival" thing has got to go. Sure Yanks-Mets and Cubs-White Sox certainly is exciting. But how about Brewers-Twins? Or Red Sox-Phillies? Or the latest: Blue Jays-Nationals. (You know how folks in Toronto feel about people in Washington, DC, right? Pure hatred in that rivalry.)

    Let's put the divisions on some sort of annual rotation where (for instance), the AL East would play teams from the NL East one year, the Central the next, and the West the third year. And schedule it so that the better teams from the previous year play each other (a la the NFL). Yes, that would mean some teams wouldn't play each other for quite a long stretch. These things happen. We'll find a way to get through it together.

    And to ensure that the "natural rivalries" happen at least every four years, the fourth year in the rotation will be a sort of "wild card" year, where all of the natural rivals play each other. So not only would Mets-Yankees still happen every few years, but it will be a little more exciting since it won't be happening every summer.

    Hold same day (or at least same week) appeals of suspensions

    Kenny Rogers was just the latest in a long line of freaked-out players who made a spectacle of himself-and yet continued to play while awaiting a hearing on his appeal. George Bush decided on Sandra Day O'Conner's replacement faster than Rogers' appeal happened.

    This is actually really simple: Hand down a suspension, give the player a day to decide whether or not to appeal, and then hold the appeals hearing the next day. Fly whomever is hearing the appeal to wherever the player is. This is not brain surgery.

    Oh, and you know how a pitcher will receive a suspension, appeal it, and then after pitching in the next game drop the appeal and begin his suspension? No more of that, please. It's ridiculous. If you file an appeal, you go through with it. There should be no changing your mind. Could you imagine if real life worked this way? My license is going to be suspended for 30 days? Well, I'll appeal that, but the day before my two-week vacation I'll drop the appeal and start serving my suspension.

    Stop the pitcher/hitter over-reactions to close pitches

    This one's going to sound drastic, but hear me out. The only way to stop this lunacy is with something just as crazy. So here are a couple of proposals: Pitchers are allowed only one hits batsmen per game. If you hit a second batter you're thrown out. Period. Sure, sometimes HBPs are accidental, but who can tell anymore? Too drastic? How about this one: If a second player from one team is hit with a pitch in the same game, that batter goes to second and another player (a pinch runner) is put on first. Back in the old (really old) days there were "phantom runners" all the time. Invisible man on first!

    And what about the batters? If some form of punishment can be instituted on the pitchers' side, then we could prohibit all of the body armor that batters wear to the plate nowadays. And enforce (and strengthen) the "diving in" rule. Anyone who gets hit while leaning out over the plate (or not attempting to avoid the pitch) not only doesn't get first base-he should be called out.

    Finally, institute a hockey-style third man in rule. If a batter wants to charge the mound, it's between him and the pitcher. Anyone else gets involved, they're thrown out of the game. And anyone who leaves the bench or the bullpen is suspended. Bench clearing brawls are stupid (and usually boring). Time to put an end to them.

    And so on and so on...

    Oh, there are lots more ideas where these came from. Some extreme, some not. Such as contracting a couple of teams (the Devil Rays and Brewers leap to mind). Or realigning divisions by payroll. Or even instituting that crazy soccer-style system, where the crappy teams are sent to the minors (not a bad idea the more I think about it).

    But let's start with the proposals the Czar of Sports has outlined in this two-part blog. And let's hope that the folks running baseball can come up with a few of their own. A tougher steroid policy is finally on the books. And the World Baseball Classic is a brilliant (and long overdue) creation. Major leaguers will participate in this World Cup-style tournament next March. Sending major league players to the Olympics mid-season was never going to work (and starting in 2012 there will be no more Olympic baseball anyway), so this will be the next-best thing, and should raise the awareness of baseball in other parts of the world.

    While awaiting that call from Mr. Selig, I'll keep watching. And hoping that in the near future we can build a better baseball.

     

    www.sportsinacan.com 

    0 (0 Ratings)