DH To National League
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
DH To National League
It's not supposed to benefit one team, or even five. It's supposed to benefit the league as a whole and the players as a whole.
DH To National League
132631313A0331313A3D31540 wrote: It's not supposed to benefit one team, or even five. It's supposed to benefit the league as a whole and the players as a whole.
Yes. And the Pirates and their players are a part of that league. This deal harms them by making it harder for small market teams to compete.
Yes. And the Pirates and their players are a part of that league. This deal harms them by making it harder for small market teams to compete.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
DH To National League
Doesn't mean every franchise and every player. They'd be locked out or on strike in perpetuity if that's what someone was expecting.
You can't collectively bargain for competence.
Small market? Is San Diego small? It's media market is smaller than The Burgh. Is Milwaukee small market?
San Diego made questionable moves. Competence.
Milwaukee is smaller than The Burgh. Yet, the ownership goes about its ways differently than ours.
Some dogs should quit hunting. This is one. The problem lie within.
You can't collectively bargain for competence.
Small market? Is San Diego small? It's media market is smaller than The Burgh. Is Milwaukee small market?
San Diego made questionable moves. Competence.
Milwaukee is smaller than The Burgh. Yet, the ownership goes about its ways differently than ours.
Some dogs should quit hunting. This is one. The problem lie within.
DH To National League
546176767D4476767D7A76130 wrote: Doesn't mean every franchise and every player. They'd be locked out or on strike in perpetuity if that's what someone was expecting.
You can't collectively bargain for competence.
Small market? Is San Diego small? It's media market is smaller than The Burgh. Is Milwaukee small market?
San Diego made questionable moves. Competence.
Milwaukee is smaller than The Burgh. Yet, the ownership goes about its ways differently than ours.
Some dogs should quit hunting. This is one. The problem lie within.
I don't disagree. I'm not championing for Bob Nutting. But baseball has an uneven playing field. This CBA did nothing to attempt to level it. If anything, with the anti-tanking and draft lottery, it did things to make it more unbalanced. Let's be real...that isn't punishing Bob Nutting. It's punishing the fans of the team he owns.
And I'll always go back to the constant tweaks of the game between the lines...first it was the four-finger wave for an IBB, then three-batter minimums. Now, we have the DH in the National League, soon a ban on shifts, bigger bases, probably moving the mound from 60 feet, 6 inches to 61 feet, 6 inches, and other things. Maybe they'll shorten the baselines to 89 feet. Maybe they'll mandate that each stadium bring their fences in five feet. Maybe they'll allow courtesy runners for the catcher. Other leagues do that. That was the rationale behind the NL DH. They were the only league not to have it, or something along those lines.
Maybe we'll eventually get to the point where, like in football, you have nine guys on offense, and nine on defense. Far-fetched? Perhaps. The last one likely won't happen any time soon. But I could see the others. Some of them are actively being talked about.
As an MLB.tv subscriber who lives in Iowa, I can't watch the Bucs play the Cubs, White Sox, Cardinals, Royals, Twins, or Brewers. I get precisely one of those "local" RSNs on YouTube TV. Ditto for Hulu. Now, MLB tells me that I have to subscribe to Apple TV+ if I want to watch the Bucs on Friday night if they're in one of the "select" Friday night games. They also sold some TV rights to Peacock, whatever the heck that is. In other words, if I want to watch the Pirates, I need to subscribe to MLB.tv, Apple TV+, Peacock, and AT&T. No thanks.
In other words, MLB keeps finding ways to screw over their diehard fans in the name of the almighty dollar. You may not think this is a big deal, or that the rule changes aren't a big deal. But I do. And so do many other fans. I honestly don't care that they had a lockout. I care very much that they A) didn't level the playing field between the big and small markets, B) didn't make it easier to watch games, but somehow managed to make it harder, and C) continued to tweak the rules of what was once the greatest game on earth.
Will I still follow the Bucs? Probably. But only because I'm an addict who can't break my addiction. I'd love nothing more than to be free of this pathetic team and worse league. I hate the fact that I'm a fan of this sad excuse for a professional baseball team. Off rant.
You can't collectively bargain for competence.
Small market? Is San Diego small? It's media market is smaller than The Burgh. Is Milwaukee small market?
San Diego made questionable moves. Competence.
Milwaukee is smaller than The Burgh. Yet, the ownership goes about its ways differently than ours.
Some dogs should quit hunting. This is one. The problem lie within.
I don't disagree. I'm not championing for Bob Nutting. But baseball has an uneven playing field. This CBA did nothing to attempt to level it. If anything, with the anti-tanking and draft lottery, it did things to make it more unbalanced. Let's be real...that isn't punishing Bob Nutting. It's punishing the fans of the team he owns.
And I'll always go back to the constant tweaks of the game between the lines...first it was the four-finger wave for an IBB, then three-batter minimums. Now, we have the DH in the National League, soon a ban on shifts, bigger bases, probably moving the mound from 60 feet, 6 inches to 61 feet, 6 inches, and other things. Maybe they'll shorten the baselines to 89 feet. Maybe they'll mandate that each stadium bring their fences in five feet. Maybe they'll allow courtesy runners for the catcher. Other leagues do that. That was the rationale behind the NL DH. They were the only league not to have it, or something along those lines.
Maybe we'll eventually get to the point where, like in football, you have nine guys on offense, and nine on defense. Far-fetched? Perhaps. The last one likely won't happen any time soon. But I could see the others. Some of them are actively being talked about.
As an MLB.tv subscriber who lives in Iowa, I can't watch the Bucs play the Cubs, White Sox, Cardinals, Royals, Twins, or Brewers. I get precisely one of those "local" RSNs on YouTube TV. Ditto for Hulu. Now, MLB tells me that I have to subscribe to Apple TV+ if I want to watch the Bucs on Friday night if they're in one of the "select" Friday night games. They also sold some TV rights to Peacock, whatever the heck that is. In other words, if I want to watch the Pirates, I need to subscribe to MLB.tv, Apple TV+, Peacock, and AT&T. No thanks.
In other words, MLB keeps finding ways to screw over their diehard fans in the name of the almighty dollar. You may not think this is a big deal, or that the rule changes aren't a big deal. But I do. And so do many other fans. I honestly don't care that they had a lockout. I care very much that they A) didn't level the playing field between the big and small markets, B) didn't make it easier to watch games, but somehow managed to make it harder, and C) continued to tweak the rules of what was once the greatest game on earth.
Will I still follow the Bucs? Probably. But only because I'm an addict who can't break my addiction. I'd love nothing more than to be free of this pathetic team and worse league. I hate the fact that I'm a fan of this sad excuse for a professional baseball team. Off rant.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
DH To National League
162334343F0634343F3834510 wrote: Doesn't mean every franchise and every player. They'd be locked out or on strike in perpetuity if that's what someone was expecting.
You can't collectively bargain for competence.
Small market? Is San Diego small? It's media market is smaller than The Burgh. Is Milwaukee small market?
San Diego made questionable moves. Competence.
Milwaukee is smaller than The Burgh. Yet, the ownership goes about its ways differently than ours.
Some dogs should quit hunting. This is one. The problem lie within.
One some teams have TV deals for multiple billions of dollars while others have the kind we have, there is a problem. This is true whether the Pirates run the team well or not, and whether some other teams might beat the odds and break through now and then or not.
Until that fundamental issue is changed then none of the other changes will have any real lasting effect.
You can't collectively bargain for competence.
Small market? Is San Diego small? It's media market is smaller than The Burgh. Is Milwaukee small market?
San Diego made questionable moves. Competence.
Milwaukee is smaller than The Burgh. Yet, the ownership goes about its ways differently than ours.
Some dogs should quit hunting. This is one. The problem lie within.
One some teams have TV deals for multiple billions of dollars while others have the kind we have, there is a problem. This is true whether the Pirates run the team well or not, and whether some other teams might beat the odds and break through now and then or not.
Until that fundamental issue is changed then none of the other changes will have any real lasting effect.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
DH To National League
This is among those issues where there's so much that goes into it.
The issue is competence level and finances.
We HAVE the finances to be competitive. There should be no question of that. Yet, there is. I dnk why.
What we also have is an owner who is steadfast in his approach. That is well within his prerogative. We can choose to accept it. We can choose to turn our back on it. That's our choice, like it or not.
MLB will not implement a salary floor outside of 25 x minimum. We can say what SHOULD be done....what SHOULDNT be done, but that is not OUR decision to make. And, it's not going to BE done.
If BOB was the owner of any of the other 29 clubs, no one here would think about it for ten seconds. People in other cities don't care about our problems. It's ours to solve.
We're bitching about TV contracts that other clubs have. OK. I'll give a pass on that.
Tell me why we're not matching Brewers and Padres payrolls. No one answers that. Gotta wonder.
The issue is competence level and finances.
We HAVE the finances to be competitive. There should be no question of that. Yet, there is. I dnk why.
What we also have is an owner who is steadfast in his approach. That is well within his prerogative. We can choose to accept it. We can choose to turn our back on it. That's our choice, like it or not.
MLB will not implement a salary floor outside of 25 x minimum. We can say what SHOULD be done....what SHOULDNT be done, but that is not OUR decision to make. And, it's not going to BE done.
If BOB was the owner of any of the other 29 clubs, no one here would think about it for ten seconds. People in other cities don't care about our problems. It's ours to solve.
We're bitching about TV contracts that other clubs have. OK. I'll give a pass on that.
Tell me why we're not matching Brewers and Padres payrolls. No one answers that. Gotta wonder.
DH To National League
When haven't the large markets not have an advantage? It's been that way since the leagues finally got a solid structure, and monopolized all the competition out.
There are 30 teams. Pirates haven't won it all in 42 years, yet still have the 7th most titles in all of MLB.
The Free Agency era started in 1976, Catfish Hunter the first free agent. There have been 45 World Series Champions since then. IDK what constitutes "large market" and "small market". We throw those terms around with certainty, but do we really think about them?
So I'll look at those 45 series winners, based upon the top 15 markets and bottom 15 markets. Understandably, the league has added more teams since 1976, when there were 24 teams, 26 teams in 1977-92, 28 teams 1993-97, and 30 teams since 1998.
Large Market winners (top 15 size per Bleacher Report, where I culled these rankings)
30 of them were from top 15 markets.
Large market teams were the loser in 28 of them.
Small market teams have only a 36 percent chance of even REACHING the World Series according to this.
I understand how rudimentary this is. Over that time, some of the markets could have moved in and out of the top 15 in 45 years.
But it's obvious, if you call yourself a "true fan of the game" and a fan of the game "the way it used to be"....news flash for you. Nothing's changed.
I find it interesting for people who complain so much about change, how come I never once heard anyone complain about the stadiums not being concentric throughout, like, you know...football, basketball, and hockey (took them a while too)? everything else about those sports people want baseball to be like, except perhaps the number of playoff teams.
Seems no one wants to see changes like the DH, but somehow the revenue structure of the league is supposed to be overhauled? It's the most consistent thing in all of pro sports. So why the complaining? It's ALWAYS been that way. It's ALWAYS favored the large markets. Hence why there's a large collective consciousness for people pulling for the underdog every year if there is one.
Unfortunately, the underdog doesn't get all the way through to the finals very often.
It isn't just Pittsburgh. It's pretty much the way it is for all the smaller markets.
So yes, for the most part, we should be happy to even have a team. Us, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, San Diego, Kansas City, Cleveland, Baltimore, Tampa Bay, Colorado, Seattle, and on and on only exist because the Large Markets make more money by having us around, because we make the game coast to coast, and north to south.
There are 30 teams. Pirates haven't won it all in 42 years, yet still have the 7th most titles in all of MLB.
The Free Agency era started in 1976, Catfish Hunter the first free agent. There have been 45 World Series Champions since then. IDK what constitutes "large market" and "small market". We throw those terms around with certainty, but do we really think about them?
So I'll look at those 45 series winners, based upon the top 15 markets and bottom 15 markets. Understandably, the league has added more teams since 1976, when there were 24 teams, 26 teams in 1977-92, 28 teams 1993-97, and 30 teams since 1998.
Large Market winners (top 15 size per Bleacher Report, where I culled these rankings)
30 of them were from top 15 markets.
Large market teams were the loser in 28 of them.
Small market teams have only a 36 percent chance of even REACHING the World Series according to this.
I understand how rudimentary this is. Over that time, some of the markets could have moved in and out of the top 15 in 45 years.
But it's obvious, if you call yourself a "true fan of the game" and a fan of the game "the way it used to be"....news flash for you. Nothing's changed.
I find it interesting for people who complain so much about change, how come I never once heard anyone complain about the stadiums not being concentric throughout, like, you know...football, basketball, and hockey (took them a while too)? everything else about those sports people want baseball to be like, except perhaps the number of playoff teams.
Seems no one wants to see changes like the DH, but somehow the revenue structure of the league is supposed to be overhauled? It's the most consistent thing in all of pro sports. So why the complaining? It's ALWAYS been that way. It's ALWAYS favored the large markets. Hence why there's a large collective consciousness for people pulling for the underdog every year if there is one.
Unfortunately, the underdog doesn't get all the way through to the finals very often.
It isn't just Pittsburgh. It's pretty much the way it is for all the smaller markets.
So yes, for the most part, we should be happy to even have a team. Us, Milwaukee, Cincinnati, San Diego, Kansas City, Cleveland, Baltimore, Tampa Bay, Colorado, Seattle, and on and on only exist because the Large Markets make more money by having us around, because we make the game coast to coast, and north to south.
-
GreenWeenie
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2020 3:47 pm
DH To National League
Was Catfish first? I thought it was Andy Messersmith or Dave McNally.
Regardless, we'll always have unanswered questions.
Give an incompetent $1 million, what will you get?
A temporarily wealthy incompetent.
Give a financially-conservative incompetent $1 million, what do you get? An incompetent who has money.
Regardless, we'll always have unanswered questions.
Give an incompetent $1 million, what will you get?
A temporarily wealthy incompetent.
Give a financially-conservative incompetent $1 million, what do you get? An incompetent who has money.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
DH To National League
7A7271465075525D330 wrote: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/03/ ... -rule.html
I’m out.
I don’t know why they’re wasting time. Just set a keg of beer back behind home plate, dress the players in tee shirts and shorts, and play a non-grueling seven innings already.
I’m out.
I don’t know why they’re wasting time. Just set a keg of beer back behind home plate, dress the players in tee shirts and shorts, and play a non-grueling seven innings already.