Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

The spread of equality in MLB

Options
  • 16-10-2014 2:51pm
    #1
    Fr Tod Umptious
    Registered Users Posts: 15,002 ✭✭✭✭


    With the Royals getting to their first World Series in almost 30 years I started thinking about how equitably MLB has become in the last decade or more.

    As someone who started following baseball in the mid to late 90s when the Yankee's were wining all around the place (WC champs 1996. 1998, 1999, 2000) it look like only major market teams with big budgets would win.
    There was a lot of despair about baseball and it's future at the time

    In 2001 there was even talk to 'contraction'.

    But now look at it

    Since 2000 15 different clubs have made it to the World Series
    Arizona, NYY, Anaheim (LA), San Fran, Florida (Miami), Boston, St. Louis, Chicago, Houston, Detroit, Colorado, Philly, Tampa, Texas and now Kansas City.

    And 9 different teams have won it, Arizona, New York Y, Anaheim (LA), San Fran, Florida, Boston, St. Louis, Chicago, Philly.

    So what has changed ?
    My own theory is that teams must have become more scientific in their player recruitment.
    The focus has been on build good pitching staffs with less expensive guys early in their careers, when you can still hold on to them, and supplement that with focused free agency signings.

    It's a 'Moneyball' type stuff to a certain extent.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    It is great though, whatever the reason. You'd never see a team in the lower 3rd of payroll winning any of the major football leagues in Europe or even getting in the top 5.

    You're right in saying it is because of the moneyball effect but baseball scouting is so hit and miss as well and unlike other sports, sure things in their late teens/early twenties have a much lower success rate and players who have lower ratings when they're young can come through and become stars and can be on any of the teams when they do, not just the rich ones.


  • Options
    #3
    MoyVilla9
    Registered Users Posts: 1,072 ✭✭✭MoyVilla9


    And yet the sport doesn't have a salary cap. It's great to see.


Advertisement