MLB Deteriorating?

[Cap]

Looking back at the 2023 season there seems to be a plethora of mediocre teams, even more so than usual. It's almost analogous to the current state of the heavyweight division in boxing. Pretty pathetic. There are a few standout players, but are they really that good or is it just the tepid oppo they face? What will happen if MLB expands again? Even more mediocrity?

Analytics have gone too far.

Cap

[Cobra Mgr]

I agree analytics has gone too far.

I disagree there are more mediocre teams. There may be more mediocre teams making the playoffs, which would have to happen when they opened up more slots. But when we see some consistency in who make the playoffs, (Dodgers, Astros, Braves, Phillies, Rays) then there must be some solid franchises out there.

[dsvitak]

Originally Posted by Cap

Looking back at the 2023 season there seems to be a plethora of mediocre teams, even more so than usual. It's almost analogous to the current state of the heavyweight division in boxing. Pretty pathetic. There are a few standout players, but are they really that good or is it just the tepid oppo they face? What will happen if MLB expands again? Even more mediocrity?

Analytics have gone too far.

Cap

Numbers are fine, data is fine. The key is in their proper analysis.

Having MORE data is inherently a good thing, so long as the data is accurate.

[Jordan]

I would argue that lack of a necessity to reinvest revenue sharing into your team is what makes baseball seem mediocre. The haves vs have-nots are so extreme ends of the spectrum, that it makes you question the middle

[kq76]

Mediocrity? What is it? We have 100 win teams and 100 loss teams probably every year. What more do we want, 110 win / 110 loss teams guaranteed every year? Are we defining mediocrity some other way?

Analytics going too far is a completely different argument, which I totally agree with. Whoever was truly responsible for Berrios being taken out of the game early should, not only be fired, but forever banned from baseball. I don't care who they are.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Jordan

I would argue that lack of a necessity to reinvest revenue sharing into your team is what makes baseball seem mediocre. The haves vs have-nots are so extreme ends of the spectrum, that it makes you question the middle

Is the dispersion of winning percentages greater on average now than it was in past years once you correct for the number of MLB teams?

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Is the dispersion of winning percentages greater on average now than it was in past years once you correct for the number of MLB teams?

I'm having off days right now and I can whip something up tomorrow when I know what we care about. Compared now to what? "When I was younger" is different for everybody. 2010s/20s vs. 1980s? 1950s? 1930s? I have no numbers, but my feeling would be that the spread was wider 100 years ago.

[kq76]

I'm still wondering what the impetus of this thread was. If it was to do with the regular season, were they not paying attention to the Braves and Orioles? They both had very impressive seasons. The As, Royals, Rockies, and White Sox all had pathetic seasons.

Listening to game 2 of Orioles-Rangers, I think it might have more to do with the postseason so far, that the teams with the better records aren't looking like the juggernauts that some might want them to be.

I heard the same tired argument that the byes are causing rust, giving the opening round winning teams an unfair advantage. To that I say, "hogwash!". I'd take the bye every time. Not only do you get to avoid possibly getting knocked out in the opening round, but you get to rest guys and lineup your rotation exactly how you want. It's just not guaranteed what will happen afterwards. You look at any team any year, they've probably both won and lost 3-5 games in a row, and it's not unusual that they have had losing streaks against bad teams too.

Look at the Astros this year. I picked them at the beginning of the season to go back to the WS and, while they struggled throughout the year, in the end they still won the division. But look at their September. They lost 2 of 3 against the As and lost 5 of 6 against the Royals. On top of that, they got swept by both the Yankees and Royals. But what they did do was play pretty well against the best teams and that's what got them the division.

My point is, pick a playoff team, any year, and I'm sure if look hard enough you'll find a streak of games where they played poorly and lost against teams they should have beat. Why then would we expect these teams to be juggernauts during the postseason against even better teams on average? Nah, teams get hot and they get cold. In the regular season we just don't make a big deal about it because there are so many games is all.

And why would we want the teams with better records to be juggernauts anyway? Some say there should be far less teams in the postseason, some say the higher seeds should get more home games. What next, is someone going to argue they should start the game up 4-0? Do we just want to do away with the postseason entirely and award the Braves a championship based on the regular season alone? I'm down with making a bigger deal about the best regular season record like they do in hockey with the President's Trophy, but I want the postseason. I like the running the gauntlet that the postseason is. The unexpected should be expected is all.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by kq76

I heard the same tired argument that the byes are causing rust, giving the opening round winning teams an unfair advantage. To that I say, "hogwash!". I'd take the bye every time. Not only do you get to avoid possibly getting knocked out in the opening round, but you get to rest guys and lineup your rotation exactly how you want. It's just not guaranteed what will happen afterwards

This can be looked at and statistically analyzed. For the 2013–2019 and 2021 seasons the division winners received three or four days off before starting their first post-season series, while in 2022 the top two division winners in each league received five days off.

Originally Posted by kq76

Some say there should be far less teams in the postseason, some say the higher seeds should get more home games. What next, is someone going to argue they should start the game up 4-0?

The first-place teams in the Japanese leagues start the league championship series with a one-win advantage; the KBO 4th vs. 5th first round series gives the 4th place team a one-win advantage in the best-of-three series.

There are many ways of rewarding a team in the playoffs for its better regular season performance.

[mytreds]

Here’s some data for you - the Wild Card Series games averaged 2.25 million viewers across ABC, ESPN and ESPN2, down from 2.8 million for last year.

[mytreds]

Oof

https://frontofficesports.com/rays-h...iven%20factors.

“The Rays drew just 19,704 fans to Tropicana Field on Tuesday for their American League Wild Card Series opener against the Texas Rangers — the smallest non-pandemic crowd for an MLB postseason game since the 1919 World Series.”

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by kq76

I heard the same tired argument that the byes are causing rust, giving the opening round winning teams an unfair advantage. To that I say, "hogwash!". I'd take the bye every time. Not only do you get to avoid possibly getting knocked out in the opening round, but you get to rest guys and lineup your rotation exactly how you want. It's just not guaranteed what will happen afterwards

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

This can be looked at and statistically analyzed. For the 2013–2019 and 2021 seasons the division winners received three or four days off before starting their first post-season series, while in 2022 the top two division winners in each league received five days off.

The Division Series results involving the team which played in the Wild Card Round versus the division winner which had several days off. The Wild Card Round team is listed first; the winner of the series is bolded.

2013 = TBA vs, BOS | PIT vs. SLN
2014 = KCA vs, ANA | SFN vs. WAS
2015 = HOU vs. KCA | CHN vs. SLN
2016 = TOR vs. TEX | SFN vs. CHN
2017 = NYA vs. CLE | ARI vs. LAN
2018 = NYA vs. BOS | COL vs. MIL
2019 = TBA vs. HOU | WAS vs. LAN
2021 = BOS vs. TBA | LAN vs. SFN
2022 = CLE vs. NYA | SEA vs. HOU | PHI vs. ATL | SDN vs. LAN

Of the 20 series, the team that had three to five days off won 10. So there doesn't seem to be any particular advantage to having those days off.

[Jason Moyer]

Originally Posted by Cap

What will happen if MLB expands again? Even more mediocrity?

That's literally the opposite of the effect that expansion has on talent distribution. It's been so long since the last one I doubt it would do much, but typically you get more outliers statistically and then after a few years things balance out again.

[Amazin69]

Originally Posted by mytreds

Oof

https://frontofficesports.com/rays-h...iven%20factors.

“The Rays drew just 19,704 fans to Tropicana Field on Tuesday for their American League Wild Card Series opener against the Texas Rangers — the smallest non-pandemic crowd for an MLB postseason game since the 1919 World Series.”

Well, when flipping 40% of the league makes the playoffs, the post-season feels rather like the plain old season, I imagine.

[Syd Thrift]

I honestly thought the product on the field was as good as it's been in years. I didn't realize how much good enforcing the pitch clock was going to do until I saw it in practice. Just hope that sticks around and doesn't get slowly eroded.

The "purist" (that is, the kid who remembers watching a different brand of baseball) in me thinks there are way too many strikeouts but I don't see a way of fixing that that won't outrage other "purists". I think large bullpens, starters who go 5-6 innings, and openers are just a part of the game now, like it or not, and I don't really want to try to legislate that out of the game just because I miss guys going 7-8 innings on a regular basis. I would be OK with experimenting with a slightly larger and deader ball - obviously you use it in the minors before exposing it to the big leagues - and/or moving the mound back.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Amazin69

Well, when flipping 40% of the league makes the playoffs, the post-season feels rather like the plain old season, I imagine.

Wild Card first game attendances:

TEX at TBA = 19,704
TOR at MIN = 38,450
ARI at MIL = 40,892
MIA at PHI = 45,662

Seems to be more of a Tampa Bay problem, not an MLB problem.

[Jordan]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Is the dispersion of winning percentages greater on average now than it was in past years once you correct for the number of MLB teams?

I am going to do something different than what you alluded to because math is not my forte and I just dont have time in the day this week to try and look at percentages, do the median, etc.. Instead I'm going to randomly pick some decades to denote the # of 100 win teams + 100 loss teams, which admittedly can be arbitrary. Obviously not apples to apples but I'm just going to post it and people can do with it what they will. I'll point out anything affecting numbers that comes to mind but I'm not likely to be perfect

Randomly decided on 2013-2023 (recent modern), excluding 2020 obviously, and 1970-79 ("golden age")

100+ Win/Loss Teams from the preceding subset
2023: Orioles, Braves, Dodgers/A's, Royals, White Sox, Rockies
2022: Astros, Braves, Mets, Dodgers/ A's, Pirates, Reds, Nats
2021: Rays, Giants, Dodgers/ Orioles, Rangers, Pirates, Dbacks
2019: Yankees, Twins, Astros, Dodgers/ Orioles, Tigers, Royals, Marlins
2018: Red Sox, Yankees, Astros/ Orioles, White Sox, Royals
2017: Indians, Astros, Dodgers/ No 100 Loss teams
2016: Cubs/Twins (interesting)
2015: Cardinals/No 100 Loss teams
2014: None/ None !
2013: None/ Astros, Marlins

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1979: Orioles/ Blue Jays, Athletics
1978: Yankees/ Blue Jays, Mariners
1977: Yankees, Royals, Phillies/ Blue Jays, Braves
1976: Phillies, Reds/ Expos
1975: Reds/ Tigers
1974: Dodgers/ Padres
1973: None/ Rangers, Padres
1972 (strike affected): None/ Rangers
1971: Orioles, A's/ Indians, Padres
1970: Orioles, Reds/ White Sox

[monkeyman576]

I think it's harder for teams to dominate because of analyitcs. I think that's a good thing, I don't want to see the Yankees or Dodgers win 10-3 every game.

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Wild Card first game attendances:

TEX at TBA = 19,704
TOR at MIN = 38,450
ARI at MIL = 40,892
MIA at PHI = 45,662

Seems to be more of a Tampa Bay problem, not an MLB problem.

Their attendance overall in the playoffs is up this year.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/t...D/attend.shtml

They are an outlier, but still show the same poor trends in modern MLB.

Playoff TV ratings are all around down this year. Being in Tampa has nothing to do with that.

[monkeyman576]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

I honestly thought the product on the field was as good as it's been in years. I didn't realize how much good enforcing the pitch clock was going to do until I saw it in practice. Just hope that sticks around and doesn't get slowly eroded.

The "purist" (that is, the kid who remembers watching a different brand of baseball) in me thinks there are way too many strikeouts but I don't see a way of fixing that that won't outrage other "purists". I think large bullpens, starters who go 5-6 innings, and openers are just a part of the game now, like it or not, and I don't really want to try to legislate that out of the game just because I miss guys going 7-8 innings on a regular basis. I would be OK with experimenting with a slightly larger and deader ball - obviously you use it in the minors before exposing it to the big leagues - and/or moving the mound back.

Smallball is a lost art. Bunting and stealing doesn't excite the fans or make money. Players are going to focus on home runs because that's what gets them paid. Now with exit velocity and angle analytics its easier that ever to know what it takes to get a ball out of the ballpark. That said, pitchers are throwing faster too, so it makes for an interesting dynamic but I personally love the evolution of baseball, aside from the rules.