Pete, are you really going to admit to us that you were rooting, even a little bit, for the Yankees?

Because ... wow.

...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: I don't think "Wow!" is either a positive or negative exclamation. No, I was not rooting for the Yankees, even a little, since I grew up an Angels fan, bicycle distance from their stadium.

Thanks for your thoughts regarding shifting schedules to 18 games versus "payroll peers", Mr. Shmuck, but I think you picked on a pretty small detail.

It would be fine to do the 2010 schedule based on payroll levels from 2007-2009. Few teams are going to make massive changes in a single year, and the three year average was to ensure some scheduling stability.

In a perfect world, this years' schedules could be affected by this years' payroll, but, really, using last years payroll or the previous 3 years' payroll will work just as well. It is the big market vs. small market impact that drives payroll and that doesn't change in a single year.

I really think the idea has serious merit, could be implemented without bloodshed and would act to balance the competition without going to extremes.

Here is what would happen in 2010. Based on their 3 year payroll history, the Yanks, RedSox, Mariners, Angels and Tigers would play 18 against each other and 6-7 against everyone else in the leauge, even though they would remain in the current divisional alignment. They would play inter-league games against the Mets, Cubs, Astros, Dodgers and Phillies.

The Rays, Royals, Twins, A's and maybe Indians would play 18 against each other and 6-7 against everyone else. Their Inter-league opponents would be the Marlins, Nationals, Padres, Rockies and Pirates

The O's Rangers, White Sox, Blue Jays and maybe Indians would play 18 against each other and 6-7 against everyone else. Their Interleague opponents would be the Diamondbacks, Reds, Cardnials, Brewers. Giants and Braves

The small market teams would play 11-22 fewer divisional games and 6 fewer interleague games against the richest teams. If you figure the poorest teams to be .250 against the richest, but .500 against their peers, this would allow the poorer teams to average 6 or 7 more wins per year, simply from the more level playing field.

Of course, the Richer teams would lose 6 or 7 more games per year. So the division races would be much tighter which benefits everyone. The O's would be in the middle tier. They would not get so many mismatches with the richest teams, but neither would they get mismatches with the poorest either. So their expected win totals would not be affected. Except.....

Since two of the 5 AL big boys are in their division, (also true for the A's, Rangers, BlueJays and Rays) the O's would have 22 fewer divisinal mismatches, leading to 5+ fewer losses. They would get 11 fewer games against the Rays, and Blue Jays, which would only net an expected 3 fewer wins. So they benefit more than, say, the White Sox, because they have two big spenders in their division now (which is why they need the relief)

Now I know what you're thinking... Why would the Yankees or Angels agree to a schedule that might cost them 6 or 7 wins per year? Well, mostly because they are not stupid. They want to make money. Neither one of them , nor the Red Sox , came within 6 or 7 games of missing the playoffs.

BUT - 11 extra dates against each other PLUS the fan excitement caused by closer pennant races PLUS the extra tv ratings and revenues from big market matchups will absolutely add money to their coffers. And, over time, if they want to regress to the mid-tier, they always have that option. (the system could easily be tweaked such that if payroll disparity became less pronounced, the unbalanced nature of the schedule could become less pronounced as wel. Instead of 18 games and 6-7 games, it could be 14 games vs. the payroll peers and 8-9 games vs everyone else)

How about Detroit? they could not afford to have a tougher schedule. they missed the playoffs as it was. Well, look. If you want to pay with the big boys, you have to play with the big boys. Easy enough for them to ratchet back their spending if the going is too tough for them.

This system would not eliminate the on-field advantage of overspending. But it would do quite a bit to mitigate it without requiring a payroll cap which the union would never accept or a complete break out into the rich league and the AAAA league.

If enacted now, with 18 vs payroll peers and 6-7 vs others, and if that difference was reduced towards balanced schedule in proportion to how much payroll disparity was reduced towards balanced spending, you might really have a workable approach.

...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: As I said, it is an interesting and creative idea. But it's way too late -- even now -- to do anything about next season. You have to recognize how complicated the travel logistics are for a baseball season. Teams need at least six months to put a season together. Another problem would be that if you used an average of several seasons, a team could still bulk up during the last offseason to take advantage of the low-payroll schedule.

Really, outside of the markets involved (and the media types who cover the game), does anyone truly care about the outcome of the baseball playoffs? The World Series used to be a national event ("the Fall Classic"), but now it is just an anticlimactic end to another season of dominance by the high-revenue franchises. Not to mention that all the off days, including the pending one-week hiatus between the conclusion of the LCS and the start of the World Series, eliminates any continuity of interest. Boy, have they managed to screw up our national pastime!

I guess many can soak in the tub for a long time now.

I meant Manny.

Agree with Ray. Baseball stinks these days. It is no longer fun to watch basically the same few teams in the playoffs year after year after year. I am a lifelong fan but have barely watched the playoffs this year and don't plan to start. I guess I'm not much of a fan anymore then. Oh well, its your fault MLB. Make your sport more balanced and interesting and I will watch again.

Shorten the season and expand the playoffs to 16 or more teams, giving the top teams byes. Look how well the NCAA basketball tournament does since everyone can find a team to root for.

Eliminate the pointless games that teams like the O's play in August and September (now extending into July when they play this badly) and allow them to play some high-pressure, win-or-go-home games on national television that will attract fans.

This is what the NBA does too.

Here's a history lesson for all of you: the Phillies are not the first Philadelphia-based major league baseball team to win consecutive league pennants. That would have to be Connie Mack's Athletics (now based in Oakland), who actually did it three times - 1910-11, 1913-14 & 1929-30-31. Obviously, all this happened before Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier in 1947.

I find it amusing that the baseball media made a big stink about the Phillies achieving its 10,000th loss a few years ago but haven't mentioned that their defeats have pretty much ground to a halt ever since. Just an observation.

baseball neither needs inter-league play
nor being played in late october/november. end the seson sept.2nd,start playoffs a wek later.
more interest, fewer injuries,more revenue. oh and terminate bad umpires, mcclelan comes to mind.

I touted the Phillies last year when the Sun's bloggers gave them no chance against the Dodgers and am not surprised that they dispatched the Dodgers with similar swiftness this year. I say they knock off the Skankees in 6 this year. I just hope someday to be able to pick the O's in 6 over somebody.

can't anybody umpire this game?

Can we dream for a moment that Angelos would have just sat back and let Pat Gillick build a team and Davey Johnson manage it. Do you think we would have our own dynasty? I don't think Bobby Bonilla and David Wells were worth twelve years of losing even if they got us a wild card spot in '96.

Go Phillies. Let the haters hate. O's fans just have (success envy) issues. The better team won. Did you people watch the series. 8th innings and 9th innings comebacks. That was some great baseball. They shut down manny, furcal, and kemp. they crushed dodger pitching. even the 8 hole got a 3 run shot. everyone in the starting line up except the pitchers hit a home run. EVERYONE. Watch with green eyes O's Phillies are the DEFENDING champs

Though Bell and Snyder are tearing it up in the Fall League, we can't rely on them starting the '10 season as our everyday corner infielders. With that said, they do look pretty promising. If we could get one guy at the corner who's a guarantee at 25+ hr 100 rbis, and find an average replacement (not an Eaton/Simon caliber fielder) at the other corner to give these prospects a bit more time to develop, I'd consider this offseason productive on the offensive front.

You've said before, Pete, that you wouldn't mind having John Lackey. I don't know that I totally understand your standards or what you expect the O's rotation to look like next Spring, but Lackey would be the biggest possible improvement our club could make this winter. Not having to watch the O's lose has given me the opportunity to see some of these players on winning teams play good ball. What about Lackey don't you like. Maybe you think we just won't be able to bring him to Baltimore, but everyone has a price. The question is, what will it take to get him here? The FOX guys think he'll get more than AJ (5 yr, 82.5 mil) despite the economy, and they're probably right considering he's the best free agent pitcher. Should the O's bite the bullet? A four year 80 mil with a good option fifth year?

What do you think it'd take to bring him here, Pete?

...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Probably $90 - $100 million over five years, and he still might not want to play here.

As much as I would love it, there's no way Lackey is coming to Baltimore and even if (somehow) the Orioles blow everyone out of the water with a big-time offer. If he leaves the Angels, you figure he would be just another to sign with Boston, NY or LA or maybe he goes to the NL where he could probably dominate.

What does everyone think of Troy Glaus??

Christian, I am not a big Troy Glaus fan, but given how weak the 3B free agents are, I would like to see the O's go after Mike Lowell. He doesn't want to be a part time player so the Sox are exploring trade options. I believe he has 1yr at 10 mil left on his deal and I also can't imagine the Sox would be scared of the O's acquiring Lowell in terms of pushing them to the top so what you would have is a guy in his contract year who is completely healthy and the O's buy another year for Snyder or Bell, to excel in the minors, as well as to see what the 2010 free agent class will bring in terms of 3B plus if the O's aren't in it or close to .500 which would be HUGE for this franchise, they have a big trading chip in a veteran 3B.

The O's payroll could be mid 90's every year. We aren't the Pirates nor the Royals. Look at the 41 mil wasted on Walker, Bradford and Baez or 20 mil for Huff when no one else wanted him so it's a case of bad spending, as well over spending that continues to haunt this team. The O's will never be in the category of the Sox or Yanks, but they are by no means a mid-market team in my book. If the O's played well again, crowds would be back, ratings would go up on MASN which leads to more advertising and the chain reaction begins. I would like a salary cap, but I don't see it happening so the O's are going to have to learn to avoid the David Segui like contracts they loved giving out so much.

What's going on here?

"Baseball stinks these days. It is no longer fun to watch basically the same few teams in the playoffs year after year after year."

So you must think all of the three major sports stink:

The Lakers have played in the NBA finals in six of the past 10 years. Heck, seven of the past 10 NBA titles belong to the Lakers and Spurs.

In the NFL, the Patriots, Colts and Steelers have dominated the AFC playoffs since 2000. And if you turned on the NFC Championship game at any given time over the past ten years, you would have had a 50% chance of seeing the Eagles play (and a 40% chance of watching them lose).

And what's with all of this love for the Phillies?

The Yankees spend a ton of money and play in consecutive World Series' and everyone screams for a salary cap and George Steinbrenner's head.

The Phillies spend a lot of money (7th in payroll and only $10M behind the Red Sox, who everyone here complains about as well) and play in consecutive World Series and everyone cheers them on.

Is this an episode of the Twilight Zone?

Holy crap.

A Quad Post.

This must be the Twilight Zone.

Sorry about that fellas.

Could you knock out a few of those dupes for me, Pete?

b-

I don't know about everybody else, but I live 50 miles from Philadelphia, and the Phillies AAA team is a 10 minute ride from my house. I was born and raised in Balmer and The Birds are my #1 team always (unless they pull an Irsay), but the Phils are my local team and as long as they're not playing the O's I root for them, and have done so since 1965 when they played in the old, decrepit Connie Mack Stadium, which is now 3 ballparks ago and was torn down in 1976. Also, if they end up playing the Skankees, you can bet your bippy that I'll be rooting for them, cuz I wouldn't root for the Yankees under any circumstances.

b,
no matter how many times you say it...

you think at about post 3 it might sink in?

When we call a team that has gone to the WS twice in a row (and hadn't been there for quite a bit before that) a DYNASTY - sign that baseball is nowhere near as great and wonderful as it had been.

In no way are they a dynasty. The Bulls were a dynasty. The Cowboys were a dynasty. The Phillies are a freaking team that has gone two years in a row. They lose this, and all that dynasty garbage goes out the window....

Where is the critical thinking among fans these days?

When you are on the outside looking in, as Oriole fans are, it is hard to get excited about another team's success. I used to be a rabid baseball fan and would scan the cable for any game that was on. The Orioles have given me baseball fatigue.

I must admit that I have only watched an inning or two of the post season and could care less.

I haven't watched an NBA game since the Bullets left town, and could care less. I used to go to see them at the Civic center 20 or 30 times a year.

Same for hockey, I loved to attend Clippers games, but have not watched or attended a hockey game since the Clippers left, and could care less.....

...And unless I missed something I can't seem to find my old Alma Mater, the U of M's football games on Comcast. I couldn't even name a player on the team as a result.

I am probably wrong about the University of Maryland's football games not being shown on Comcast, since I have the York County Pa version. Comcast does pipe in a number of Baltimore channels though, and I have yet to see Maryland scheduled.

Every Penn State football game in on Comcast up here, and I know a lot about the team as a result.

Pete, still think Baez should have challenged Ryan Howard?

..............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Why not? It's not like it would cost the Orioles the World Series.

jim66.

I think the problem is that mlb will let anybody umpire a game.

Please enlighten an old guy and explain some of this new age jargon. I have seen posters use the word "Haters" numerous times. What exactly is a "Hater?" Is it someone who doesn't agree with your opinion?

Also, what exactly does the term" My Bad" mean. Does it mean that you are accepting responsibility for an error? I even hear some of younger sports talk radio people use it.

Signed,
Gil the old and the ignorant.

...............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Yes, I think you're right that the term "haters" is generally used to demonize someone who doesn't agree with whoever is using the term. "My bad" means that you are taking responsibility for whatever bad happened.

You didn't hear much complaining around here during the early '90s when Camden Yards first opened and Peter Angelos was buying every free agent and driving up salaries. All we heard was what a great baseball town Baltimore was.

The Orioles aren't bad now because they play in a small market. They are bad because they have a meddling owner and a bad farm system.

The Phillies are good now because they have a very good farm system that has turned out the core of their team (Rollins, Utley, Howard, Hamels) and allowed them to trade for missing pieces (Lidge, Cliff Lee). They picked up Victorino in the rule 5 draft and plucked Jayson Werth off of the trash heap after the Dodgers gave up on him. Their only big money free agent signing has been Raul Ibanez.

The Phillies have played things the right way and should be commended for it. All of this talk about them being a big market team is a bunch of garbage. Sounds like sour grapes to me.

You didn't hear much complaining around here during the early '90s when Camden Yards first opened and Peter Angelos was buying every free agent and driving up salaries. All we heard was what a great baseball town Baltimore was.

The Orioles aren't bad now because they play in a small market. They are bad because they have a meddling owner and a bad farm system.

The Phillies are good now because they have a very good farm system that has turned out the core of their team (Rollins, Utley, Howard, Hamels) and allowed them to trade for missing pieces (Lidge, Cliff Lee). They picked up Victorino in the rule 5 draft and plucked Jayson Werth off of the trash heap after the Dodgers gave up on him. Their only big money free agent signing has been Raul Ibanez.

The Phillies have played things the right way and should be commended for it. All of this talk about them being a big market team is a bunch of garbage. Sounds like sour grapes to me.

Jeff -

Philadelphia's payroll is over $100M. They're a large market team (or they at least spend like one) no matter how you slice it.

The big difference between the Phillies and, say, the Yankees or Mets, is that Philadelphia has spent their money on home grown players. They've been insanely fortunate to develop four legitimate superstars over the past seven or eight years in Jimmy Rollins, Chase Utley, Ryan Howard and Cole Hamels. And they've also been insanely fortunate that they've had enough money to keep those four guys in town.

In short, you can't argue with the fact that the Phillies draft well (and/or they've been fortunate in the draft). Rollins, Utley, Howard and Hamels are proof of that. And so are Cliff Lee, Joe Blanton and Brad Lidge. It's pretty amazing that the Phillies already had a great core in place and they still had the prospects available to deal for two solid starters and a closer.

But you also can't argue with the fact that they've spent a lot of money keeping their young players in town.