Jump to content
North Side Baseball
Posted
43 minutes ago, soccer10k said:

I’m perfectly fine with this WS and will enjoy not having a team in there that I don’t want to win, which has been pretty common the past 6 years with Houston or LA in there every year.

It's nice not to have to half-dread the outcome of a championship round after spending (personally, at least) the bulk of the last 15 years dealing with that across several sports.

  • Replies 7.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Outside of the ALCS/NLCS round, the playoffs have been a real dud.  Game 1 of the World Series was great, but since then the games have been largely non-competitive.  Paul Sullivan has an article in the Tribune today about diminishing ratings.

Quote

The Series opener, which featured Corey Seager’s game-tying, two-run home run in the bottom of the ninth and Adolis García’s walk-off home run in the 11th, turned out to be the lowest-rated Game 1 in Series history with an average of 9.172 million viewers on Fox.

Game 2, a close affair until the Diamondbacks pulled away in the eighth inning in a 9-1 win, had an average of 8.15 million viewers on Fox. Monday’s Game 3 was the least-watched Series game on record with an average of 8.13 million viewers as the Rangers won 3-1.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-world-series-texas-rangers-arizona-diamondbacks-20231101-d6pbfqolvjd7bhm6ljphxjwdc4-story.html

 

A big part of it is obviously the match-up and lack of star power, but how do you actually fix that?  Regular season ratings were up across MLB, so that lends credence to the idea that maybe this is an outlier due to the teams involved, but it is clear that the World Series and the MLB playoffs in general simply aren't the event they once were.  My Uber driver a couple weeks ago asked me, "Did you watch the game last night?"  I initially assumed he was referring to the previous night's NL playoff game, but it turns out he was talking about Thursday Night football on Amazon Prime.

What drastic overreaction will Manfred spearhead as a solution to increase future postseason ratings?

  • 3 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
3 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

What's the benefit here? They get the same optics for cheaper and longer by going 10 years.

Not paying real money for a catcher's late 30's on the hope that he'll hold up for that long.

Posted
1 minute ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Aren’t they paying him more in a scenario with a high AAV over fewer years? What’s “hold up” at $14 a year over the course of a decade? That’s not even Taillon 2023 money!

 

Probably not, and even then it's not about the total outlay, it's about guaranteeing 8 figures to a 37-39 y/o catcher.  Will that sink the Dodgers to irrelevance?  No, but the odds are against Smith being rosterable at those ages, never mind a worthwhile contributor.  So if they could pay him 6/120 or w/e the real number is would be preferable if they truly don't care about the LT.

Posted
2 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

That’s one way to look at it. Another is that they’re committed, at a moderate salary and cap hit for a starter at any position, to a particularly skilled catcher for ages 29-39. The odds are against anyone being rosterable at any age if you really want to get general. Why not save the $6 million in space over a few years if you’re already willing to go over a half decade into age 35? How much safer is 35 v 37 v 39? The lower hit has plenty of value on its own. They also don’t have to prove even more a willingness to go over the various luxury tax lines, likely isn’t a motivator

Your initial point was that the Dodgers were looking for ways to use the space given how much was locked up, so I think not having to pay real money to a profile(late 30s catcher) who is unlikely to be worth a roster spot is a pretty desirable reason to not save the 6 million?

Posted

Joey Bart DFA'd by the Giants.  Remember how disappointed I was when I found out the original rumor that Bart was in the KB trade was wrong.

Old-Timey Member
Posted
4 hours ago, UMFan83 said:

Joey Bart DFA'd by the Giants.  Remember how disappointed I was when I found out the original rumor that Bart was in the KB trade was wrong.

I'd still be interested in him on a minor league deal - he's a potential change of scenery candidate. I'd rather him than a guy like Curt Casali.

  • Like 1
Old-Timey Member
Posted

I am very very much of the mind to push back on the idea that guys don't care about the game just because they're not red-asses.  But Rendon's on record about it so it's gotta inform how salvageable you think the rest of his Angels' tenure is.

 

Posted
On 4/4/2024 at 4:01 PM, Bertz said:

I am very very much of the mind to push back on the idea that guys don't care about the game just because they're not red-asses.  But Rendon's on record about it so it's gotta inform how salvageable you think the rest of his Angels' tenure is.

 

He got a hit today to raise his average to .212. Oh wait that's his OPS this year.

And yes I know it's only been 30 PA's and guys have these stretches all the time.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

×
×
  • Create New...