Jump to content

Keepleyland2

7/15, 7/16, 7/17 Futures, Derby, All-Star game thread

Recommended Posts

Just now, Walewander said:

I just died due to lack of baseball.

 

there is a game tonight Cardinals at Cubs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RatkoVarda said:

Alcantara has 7 starts at 2B, so they should be able to find Paredes time at all 3 positions

-also Paredes is the 2nd youngest player in the Eastern League after Vlad Jr

Vlad Jr is gonna be promoted to AAA when he comes back from injury.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shelton said:

I would guess 2nd, but Alcantara could get bumped to Toledo soon, too. 

Yeah I could see a bump for Alcantara. In any case, Paredes is starting at 2B today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paredes is playing 2B at Erie and has 2 singles and a sac fly in his 3 AB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kdog said:

Paredes is playing 2B at Erie and has 2 singles and a sac fly in his 3 AB.

Not good enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2018 at 2:03 PM, tiger337 said:

Yeah, I don't enjoy that kind of game.  There are more strikeouts than hits this year for the first time ever.  

I've been searching for an apt comparison for what is happening in baseball and I think I came across it today reading an old recap of the cola wars. It's the marketing situation that has become known as the Pepsi Paradox. When Pepsi started doing advertising based on blind taste testing, their sales skyrocketed because blindfolded people always chose Pepsi after *one sip*. And that is because sweeter always make the better immediate impression. But strangely enough, once the ad campaign had run its course and once Coke got past the 'New Coke' fiasco, it eventually re-established it dominance - because when you drink the product everyday, often more than once, sweeter is *not* really better (at least among the entire universe of cola drinkers)

This is exactly where Baseball is with the HR. HRs are the sugar in the game. The league believe the fans want the home runs, maybe the fans think they do too - it's what gets them out of their seats at the games etc. But longer term, the HRs are causing dislocations in the game play that result in the overall game being less appealing with the resulting overall loss in fandom. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I've been searching for an apt comparison for what is happening in baseball and I think I came across it today reading an old recap of the cola wars. It's the marketing situation that has become known as the Pepsi Paradox. When Pepsi started doing advertising based on blind taste testing, their sales skyrocketed because blindfolded people always chose Pepsi after *one sip*. And that is because sweeter always make the better immediate impression. But strangely enough, once the ad campaign had run its course and once Coke got past the 'New Coke' fiasco, it eventually re-established it dominance - because when you drink the product everyday, often more than once, sweeter is *not* really better (at least among the entire universe of cola drinkers)

This is exactly where Baseball is with the HR. HRs are the sugar in the game. The league believe the fans want the home runs, maybe the fans think they do too - it's what gets them out of their seats at the games etc. But longer term, the HRs are causing dislocations in the game play that result in the overall game being less appealing with the resulting overall loss in fandom. 

I think that's a pretty good description for what is happening. 

For me, I feel like the game is the best when the slugfests and the high K games are the outliers. I love that stuff when it I am drip fed it, but for the most part... I want to see doubles in the gap and great plays all over the field. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't mind all the homers and K's.  To me all that matters is that the game is close and there is alot of drama at the end, I couldn't care less how they get to that.  It's now different than basketball or football to me, as long as the games are tight at the end it can be a shootout or defensive struggle, I won't care as long at it is close.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RandyMarsh said:

I honestly don't mind all the homers and K's.  To me all that matters is that the game is close and there is alot of drama at the end, I couldn't care less how they get to that.  It's now different than basketball or football to me, as long as the games are tight at the end it can be a shootout or defensive struggle, I won't care as long at it is close.  

I would argue that it's affecting more than just scoring and Ks though. It affects pace of play because of the K and because of the strain on pitchers leading to shorter outings, more changes, it reduces balls in play and thus action in general. It increases the value of shift because as long as the HR/FB ratio stays high guys won't try to beat it going the other way. The other thing is that base runners running the bases generate tension in the game and are a big source of unpredictability. You lose some of that also with the now typical walk/HR sequence we see so much of.

To me it's mostly about the pitching though. After watching many teams try without success to find ways to get their starters to go deeper, I have come to conclusion that the problem is not in today's pitchers but in the strain they work under when every single pitch to every single hitter can potentially leave the yard. So I would love to see starters go more innings and BPs get shorter so that we would get back to more position players on a roster. That allows for more line-up match-ups and also more pinch hitting options, which is another source of game interest and non-HR offense which has been lost. The average OPS platoon split is about 80 pts for a LHH and 50 for a RHH hitter. When you have no roster space for platoon players you lose that extra offense potential. For instance, those Tigers teams of the 60's with Horton, Stanley, Kaline, Northrup probably could not have carried all four of those guys if they had had a 13 man pitching staff.

You could get around the last one by increasing the roster, but the owners have been pretty resistant even in flush times to taking on another salary, seems even less likely with attendance down.

Anyway - that is my theory of the current game - at least until I have some new reasons to think otherwise.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I've been searching for an apt comparison for what is happening in baseball and I think I came across it today reading an old recap of the cola wars. It's the marketing situation that has become known as the Pepsi Paradox. When Pepsi started doing advertising based on blind taste testing, their sales skyrocketed because blindfolded people always chose Pepsi after *one sip*. And that is because sweeter always make the better immediate impression. But strangely enough, once the ad campaign had run its course and once Coke got past the 'New Coke' fiasco, it eventually re-established it dominance - because when you drink the product everyday, often more than once, sweeter is *not* really better (at least among the entire universe of cola drinkers)

This is exactly where Baseball is with the HR. HRs are the sugar in the game. The league believe the fans want the home runs, maybe the fans think they do too - it's what gets them out of their seats at the games etc. But longer term, the HRs are causing dislocations in the game play that result in the overall game being less appealing with the resulting overall loss in fandom. 

It's this kind of post that makes me love you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I've been searching for an apt comparison for what is happening in baseball and I think I came across it today reading an old recap of the cola wars. It's the marketing situation that has become known as the Pepsi Paradox. When Pepsi started doing advertising based on blind taste testing, their sales skyrocketed because blindfolded people always chose Pepsi after *one sip*. And that is because sweeter always make the better immediate impression. But strangely enough, once the ad campaign had run its course and once Coke got past the 'New Coke' fiasco, it eventually re-established it dominance - because when you drink the product everyday, often more than once, sweeter is *not* really better (at least among the entire universe of cola drinkers)

This is exactly where Baseball is with the HR. HRs are the sugar in the game. The league believe the fans want the home runs, maybe the fans think they do too - it's what gets them out of their seats at the games etc. But longer term, the HRs are causing dislocations in the game play that result in the overall game being less appealing with the resulting overall loss in fandom. 

Nice comparison, but isn't this only becoming a slight issue this year and mainly because of the K rate that is going with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think an increase in Ks and HRs has much to do with baseball’s popularity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

Nice comparison, but isn't this only becoming a slight issue this year and mainly because of the K rate that is going with it?

the question is what is driving the K rate. I would say two things. Fewer guys willing to cut down their swings with 2 strikes - trying to hit the HR because they can (live ball) but the second is that the relative value of the K is going up as compared to outs made on balls in play because any ball in play has too high a chance of going out. IOW pitchers have to pitch more for the K now because it is  the only safe way to get an out. Look at how you have to beat a pitcher like JV today - solo HRS is about all he gives up because hitters can't string together hits agains him. Conversely he has to pitch full out to every hitter because they all can hit home runs. It feeds itself.

Mickey Lolich goes back to this point when he has talked about why he was able to complete so many games, pitch so many innings. He never felt like he had to try to strike out a Mark Belanger. If he came up with the bases empty it didn't matter very much if hit the ball, he'd likely at most get a single - so all he had to do was throw low effort FBs for strikes - which is much less stress than the way pitchers have to approach every batter today.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shelton said:

I don’t think an increase in Ks and HRs has much to do with baseball’s popularity.

even if it turns out to be one of the underlying causes of pace of play issues? (along with velcro batting gloves of course 🤔)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shelton said:

I don’t think an increase in Ks and HRs has much to do with baseball’s popularity.

Yeah I agree.  When it comes to marketing individual players I think MLB does have a problem.  Well I guess I shouldn't say MLB cause maybe it's just baseball but I find it weird how relatively unknown guys like Trout are.  ESPN put out a list of the 100 most famous athletes and not a single baseball player was even in the top 100.  To me that signals a marketing problem.

I guess come to think of it,  being a teen in the mid to late 90s I think other than Ken Griffey Jr. there were no baseball players that were as well known as basketball and football players, atleast in my school.   I wonder when stuff like that all started and what MLB can do about it?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, RandyMarsh said:

Yeah I agree.  When it comes to marketing individual players I think MLB does have a problem.  Well I guess I shouldn't say MLB cause maybe it's just baseball but I find it weird how relatively unknown guys like Trout are.  ESPN put out a list of the 100 most famous athletes and not a single baseball player was even in the top 100.  To me that signals a marketing problem.

I guess come to think of it,  being a teen in the mid to late 90s I think other than Ken Griffey Jr. there were no baseball players that were as well known as basketball and football players, atleast in my school.   I wonder when stuff like that all started and what MLB can do about it?  

I think there is something else at work here though - there are few national baseball telecasts anymore and certainly fewer with high ratings, so people don't watch games other than their home team and when they watch their home team they (and the broadcasters) don't pay the kind of attention to the other team that they would if they were watching two neutral teams on a national broadcast. I think it's national broadcasts that are most effective at building national player identities. 

Now part of this is with every team now telecasting every one of 162 games there is so much baseball available it drives out other coverage, so it's not necessarily a bad thing for the local fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, RandyMarsh said:

Yeah I agree.  When it comes to marketing individual players I think MLB does have a problem.  Well I guess I shouldn't say MLB cause maybe it's just baseball but I find it weird how relatively unknown guys like Trout are.  ESPN put out a list of the 100 most famous athletes and not a single baseball player was even in the top 100.  To me that signals a marketing problem.

I guess come to think of it,  being a teen in the mid to late 90s I think other than Ken Griffey Jr. there were no baseball players that were as well known as basketball and football players, atleast in my school.   I wonder when stuff like that all started and what MLB can do about it?  

I think the problem is 2 fold.  The first thing is that MLB players get such big contracts in comparison to the other sports.  They do not 'need' that extra income from marketing themselves.  At least the tops guys do not and no one really wants to know about a guy like Candelario so he is not going to try and market himself.  I also think the majority of MLB players do not want to play the game of marketing...I have nothing to back that up other than my sense of the players.  Manfred was asked this about a guy like Trout and he basically said 'well Trout really does not want to market himself'  I am guessing it has to be a 2 way street to REALLY push a guy out there.  I would assume it is something in the bargaining agreement that the player has to agree to a certain level over normal for marketing.

The 2nd big one IMO is that the majority of the REALLY good players are not native to America.  They do not live here full time.  When the season is over they go home.  You can point to the language barrier also, but I do not think that plays as big a role as some do.

The season for baseball is simply so long that I would guess when the season is over players just want to unplug.  Football is like 3 months once a week.  Baseball is like 6 months 6 times a week.  I think that plays into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good points

18 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

I think the problem is 2 fold.  The first thing is that MLB players get such big contracts in comparison to the other sports.  They do not 'need' that extra income from marketing themselves. 

yes.

Quote

The 2nd big one IMO is that the majority of the REALLY good players are not native Americans

I'd put a slight different take on the same point here - I don't think the fans care where a player is from so much, but if he doesn't communicate well in English (or care to) it sure hurts his connection to fans. Take the contrast between VMart and Iglesias with Cabrera. We hardly know Miguel at all compared to the other two even though he is the one fans would be most interested in.

Basketball is also a little unique in that there a single product with a a very competitive market that is widely purchased that links directly to the game play and players (shoes) so that creates a big pot of marketing money looking for player sponsors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention that player marketing isn't really Manfred's long term problem anyway, it's getting more kids playing the game. The league might even think about doing things to support adult softball. I don't think you will ever make that many hardcore baseball fans from people who haven't played on a diamond themselves somewhere at some level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

good points

yes.

I'd put a slight different take on the same point here - I don't think the fans care where a player is from so much, but if he doesn't communicate well in English (or care to) it sure hurts his connection to fans. Take the contrast between VMart and Iglesias with Cabrera. We hardly know Miguel at all compared to the other two even though he is the one fans would be most interested in.

Basketball is also a little unique in that there a single product with a a very competitive market that is widely purchased that links directly to the game play and players (shoes) so that creates a big pot of marketing money looking for player sponsors.

You got that in before I fixed my 'Native Americans' to Native to America.

Yeah my main point about that was not from the fans perspective more from the players...ie the player goes home and maybe does a little marketing in his home country, but does not care to do any here.  I do no think the fans care where they are from these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

Not to mention that player marketing isn't really Manfred's long term problem anyway, it's getting more kids playing the game. The league might even think about doing things to support adult softball. I don't think you will ever make that many hardcore baseball fans from people who haven't played on a diamond themselves somewhere at some level.

I agree kids need to play to be interested, but I think marketing does go a long way toward that for kids.  I never knew shoes were such a driving force in why people would care about a certain player etc.  Maybe that is because I came from a poor family and if I tried to get my father to buy me a pair of Jordans or something he would have laughed himself silly....in fact one of his biggest threats to me as a kid when I would screw up at the private school he was paying for me to go to was 'you want to go to 'x school' where they shoot you over your shoes!'...there were a rash of kids shooting other kids and stealing their shoes in our neighborhood back when I was growing up.

I heard another interesting theory the other day that the MLB only has a sanctioned game for the playstation and not the xbox.  More kids use the xbox apparently.  I think that is a very minor cause, but I think it may contribute a little.

Baseball requires things kids these days are simply not interested in.  Patience, hard work a long term goal as opposed to instant gratification.  Going to 'play' baseball and not getting a hit or having a ball come to you in the outfield is probably imensely boring for a kid who does not already love the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2018 at 11:21 PM, Keepleyland2 said:

Who?

Joe Jiminez is the worst all-star ever

 

Not that I care about the all-star game, but he is one of the worst allstars ever.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...