Wednesday, March 15, 2006, 03:38 PM EST
[
General]
The debate is already starting to heat up, is Spring Training more important than having the WBC? Both are "competing" for top billing in the build-up to the regular season. Which one has the edge, if any, and which one will go the way of the dinosaur? Let's take a look at each one.
Spring Training - The traditional start to the season where players hone there skills in short outings over the course of about a month. This is the chance for younger players to show what they have and make a run at a possible roster spot. It helps build team chemistry going into the season.
Some drawbacks however are that the games are essientally meaningless. Sure, players get their at-bats in as they warm up for the start of the season, but they mean nothing and unless you're trying to win a spot on the roster there is little if any pressure. Even when there is pressure to perform it isn't for the team, it is for the individual.
Spring Training games are boring. Sorry, they really are. It's a nice warm, friendly atmosphere around spring training games but with nothing on the line there is an aurua of nothingness around the games. Sure it's nice to win, but how many guys really care about the win in spring training over personal achievement. I love baseball, don't get me wrong, but at my most recent spring training game I found the kids running up and down the hill along the 3rd baseline more interesting.
The WBC - I probably wasn't as leary about it's prospects off the bat as most were. I thought it was a great idea who's time has come. Although I was setting myself up for disappointment with all the big names declining to play, I was getting more and more worried. However the level of play and passion in the games has showed. It's been a success so far and only will get better.
The games actually have meaning to them. For most of the MLB players in the WBC their normal spring training would consist of extremely limited at-bats in early innings. Now they step to the plate with national pride on the line. It gives those players a real chance to gain more experience in situations that they will never come across in a Spring Training game. Besides, like I said before, it's great baseball we're seeing and it's televised. Spring Training games are occasionally televised, so the WBC gives more exposure to fans who can't see a Spring game that starts at 1 pm (I'm not sure but it seems like almost all of them do).
One last thing the WBC does is actually allow for more playing time in Spring Training for guys trying to make the team. Players missing from their clubs camp mean more oppertunity for those players still there. I like the WBC, I like it a lot. To me Spring Training is already the substitute for watching the WBC.
I want to defend some criticisms of the tournament. First is the pitch counts. People can complain about this all they want, fact is these pitchers are probably getting more work in than they would in Spring Training. If not more at least an equal amount against more quality batters.
It detracts from Spring Training. Well, ok there is a point here. If I was a big fan of a certain star player and took the time to head to spring training to see them, I might be a little mad. But, seriously though, how often do the Barry Bonds' of the league play in Spring Games. A lot of the guys don't make the trips to other spring ball parks. Chances are unless you are there for opening day of Spring Training, you could very easily go to the game and not see your favorite player at all.
The last issue I want to address is the "soccer attitude". The Soccer Attitude is this, people will not even consider giving this a chance (like soccer in america) and will bad mouth the whole thing, find faults where they can and yet never even watch a game. That really bothers me. Along with that attitude is that if the US isn't in it then it's no longer interesting. Fair point to some degree, but if you are just watching the US games you are missing out on the whole point of the WBC and some amazing baseball being played in other games.
I guess a lot of the attitude is aversion to change. I take issue with people complaining about soccer and how boring it is, etc etc etc, who have never watched a game and just form their opinion on the sport because the media here doesn't like it. Probably more due to the fact that they have no clue about the sport and if they don't understand it, it must be bad. I've heard the same sort of garabage spewed about the WBC from some in the media. Get a clue, watch the games then say what you have to say.