Why MLB is the best

[78crusader]

I realize this is a basketball-dominated board, but I just thought I'd share several of the many reasons why MLB is the best sport, hands down  Here they are:

(1) Records matter. Everyone knows that Aaron hit 755 home runs.  Nobody knows how many points Jordan scored or how many TDs Rice scored.  And no one particularly cares, either.  (No, I don't recognize the guy who hit 762 home runs.)

(2) The 7th inning stretch.

(3) The stats today can be compared with the stats, say, of 1940.  It is a timeless game.  And the rules today are basically the same as they were back then. 

(4) Singing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" at the ballgame.

(5) Hot dogs/brats/polish eaten at a ballpark taste great.  The same hot dog/brat/polish eaten at, say, The United Center or Assembly Hall tastes like one of Charles Barkley's practice socks.

(6) No interruption of play due to endless TV time outs.  Actual experience from last year when I was watching a pro football game: running play, time out and commercials; pass play, end of quarter, commercials; running play, injury, time out and commercials; touchdown, extra point; tv timeout and commercials; kickoff, tv timeout, commercials.  Totals: 6 plays, 15 minutes of watching.  And about 18 car commercials. 

(7) It doesn't take 15 minutes to play the last 2:30 of the game like it does in basketball.  Fouls and yes, those pesky timeouts again -- ruin a lot of basketball games.

(8) When MLB drafts or signs a high school kid, he's already graduated from school, instead of signing him before he's old enough to drive his date to the school dance.  And, by the way: the kids who sign an MLB contract haven't been to multiple high schools, either. 

(9) No Rick Pitino in MLB!

(10) No pressure to "upgrade" facilities in order to impress a 17-year old kid.

(11) Indoor stadiums are on their way out in MLB; ever watch an NFL game on TV played at, say, Ford Field in Detroit or the Georgia Dome?  Snoozeville. (Why build an indoor stadium in GEORGIA?  Oh, yeah...it's those November snowstorms that plague the Atlanta area every year.)

(12) Don't have to listen to "bracketologists" prattle on about who will make the 68-team (soon to be 96 or 128 team, you can count on it) field.

(13) Frosty Malts!

I'm sure there are HUNDREDS more reasons why MLB rules!

Paul

[rlh]

Personally, my preferences are college basketball, college football, pro football then major league baseball.  Everything you said may be true, but there's nothing like the atmosphere at a college football or basketball game, or pro football game...and that makes the difference.

[Crusader03]

I'm a HUGE MLB fan, but I must take exception to several things...

*Records matter to some extent...the juicers have tremendously hurt the value of records, though.  Additionally, how can we really compare eras?  The deadball era and the juicer era aren't comparable in any way. 

*7th inning stretch is good, occasionally...the Cubs have made a mockery of it though.

*I can't agree with any argument in which baseball is lauded for not being as slow as other sports...there may be less breaks in the action, but man, games can be slow. 

*What other sports sign kids before they graduate from high school?

You're right on about the dogs and brats though! 

I'm probably with rlh on this one...I like college football-college hoops-pro football-MLB.  But they are all very close in my mind, and when the Cubs are winning MLB is second only to college football.

Interesting post!  Would love to talk some more baseball while basketball is slow

[valpofan56]

My personal preference is:

1. NFL (Packers)
2. MLB (Twins)
3. NCAAB (Valpo, Minnesota)
4. NBA (Bulls, T'Wolves)
5. NHL (Blackhawks, Wild)
6. College hockey (St. Cloud State, Minnesota)
8. Golf (Tiger, Bubba Watson, Rory McIlroy)
9. Tennis (Andy Roddick, Rafael Nadal)
7. NCAAF (Minnesota, Valpo)

[sectionee]

Baseball is my favorite too, National League...can't stand the AL. 

1) MLB
2) College Basketball
3) Bulls basketball
4) Blackhawk hockey (in person)
5) NFL
6) College Football

[Crusader03]

1.  College football---Notre Dame
2.  College hoops---Valpo and Notre Dame
3.  NFL- Bears (but fantasy football bumps this up a notch)
4.  MLB- Cubs
5.  NBA- Bulls
6.  NHL- Hawks

All of the other sports are interesting, situationally...I can get really into soccer, golf, tennis etc if the tournament storyline is intriguing enough.

[vuweathernerd]

mlb is my favorite. followed by college basketball, college football and pro football. next rung down the ladder is nba, then nhl. golf is in there somewhere too, and international soccer.

i'll watch just about anything though, if the mood strikes, or if nothing else entertaining is on...

[valpotx]

Baseball is my favorite too, National League...can't stand the AL. 

1) MLB
2) College Basketball
3) Bulls basketball
4) Blackhawk hockey (in person)
5) NFL
6) College Football

Baseball is my favorite as well, but I can't stand the NL  .

1) Baseball - Texas Rangers, Valpo
2) College football - TCU, UT, Valpo (really any TX school as well)
3) Pro football - Denver Broncos
4) College basketball - Valpo
5) Pro basketball - Dallas Mavs baby (doesn't get exciting until playoffs is the main reason so low)!
6) Hockey - Dallas Stars
7) MLS - FC Dallas

[StlVUFan]

For me, its:

1.  MLB
2.  College Basketball (Valpo, then HL, then mid-majors)
3.  Blackhawks hockey
4.  Bears football

That's if we're talking about how intense I get.

Interestingly enough, #2 is the one sport where I have zero interest in predictive prognostication.  I don't give two wits about figuring out who is going to win the NCAA tournament, who is going to be in the final four, who is going to run away with the Horizon League, which teams are going to dominate their conferences, which players are going to be drafted in the first round (actually, I don't give two wits about anything NBA-related, except for my blog, where I try to keep up with HL draftees).  I do my bracket "As You Go".  I don't care who the stars turn out to be.  I don't identify with typical talking head language such as "If you stars aren't on their game, you can't win".

In short, I view College Basketball as an unfolding drama, as if I'm in the movie house watching it for the first time, and I have no idea how it's going to turn out.  One consequence of this is that I have zero tolerance for any serious attempt to "fix" the NCAA tournament (e.g. just because Butler shot 18% in the NC game).  The only chink in my armor is that I stop watching when the last mid-major goes down.  The last two years have been absolutely delightful.

In other words, I do not identify with the Joe Cowley's of the world who only care about their own entertainment pleasure and who crapped all over last year's tournament.

On the other hand, switch me to #1 (MLB) and I suddenly become Joe Cowley.  Don't ask me why.  During the summer months I pontificate to anyone who lends me their ear about how no names like Danny Valencia and Jason Repko can't possibly be as good as the White Sox make them look year in and year out.  During College Basketball season, I listen to Dan Bernstein say almost the exact same thing about the Shelvin Macks of my world and I roll my eyes and laugh out loud.

Go figure...

By the way, I have zero interest in the NHL or the NFL.  I only care about the Blackhawks and the Bears.  MLB is the only pro sport I partake of regardless of who is playing.

[rlh]

Isn't it interesting how there are many different opinions on this...that's what makes the world go around baby !!!!!! 8)

[Valpo89]

Outside of watching my son run cross country and track for Valpo High School, there's probably no place I'd rather be than on press row at a VU basketball game. After that it is:
Valpo High boys basketball
Valpo High football
Then, NFL (Bears, Colts)
College basketball
MLB (Cubs, Sox in that order)
NBA (Bulls)
Golf majors
Big-time running/triathlon events (Boston or NY Marathon, Olympics or World Championship track, Hawaii Ironman)
Big-time soccer (such as the women's world cup)
Wimbledon
And then the NHL only if the Blackhawks are making a run in the playoffs.

I must say that there is little to disagree about in the original post to this thread. I love going to Cubs and Sox games (and even Railcats), but the cost is pricing out the little guys like me. Can't afford a $400 day to take the family to a game.

[78crusader]

OK, even though MLB rules, there are still some things to fix.  For instance:

1. eliminate the DH
2. keep instant replay, but for disputed home runs only
3. No more wild card teams, please!  One per league is enough; do not add another one per league
4. Schedule at least two World Series games during the day
5. No more interleague games (as fun as it is to watch Yanks/Cards, for example, for every series like that we are treated to a terrible matchup like, say, Diamondbacks v. Rays or Pirates v. Mariners).  Ugh!
6. Limit the roster of All-Star teams to 25 players for each league
7. get a real, independent commissioner
8. get rid of both Florida franchises; people down there support spring training baseball, but not regular season baseball.  it's true!

Paul

Paul

[StlVUFan]

Things I would fix if I was made omnipotent commissioner for a day:

1.  Eliminate the wild card altogether -- only division winners allowed in postseason, division winner with highest W-L % gets bye to LCS.
2.  Eliminate the HR derby and eliminate the gimmick about home-field advantage in the WS, removing the illusion that the All-Star game is anything more than an exhibition game.  Alternative: eliminate the game altogether and just recognize the chosen.
3.  Institute real revenue sharing, conditioned upon the players accepting a salary cap (coupled with a salary floor, both to be floating based on the economic health of the game -- if this is starting to sound like the NFL or the NBA or the NHL, it's pure coincidence), in which recipient franchises are required to use their share on payroll either at the major or the minor league level or both.
4.  Nominate Bob Costas as the next commissioner -- the only person I can think of who is both credible to both sides and qualified.
5.  Ride off into the sunset...

Not a very coherent strategy, but mostly heartfelt.  #1 has been uppermost in my mind.  If I had the opportunity, the first thing I'd want to do is restore the integrity of the regular season, so that finishing in 1st place means everything it should mean.  Ever since 1995 this game I love has been corrupted by a lowered standard of regular season competition that has exchanged real pennant fever for a weak substitute -- "wild card fever", whatever that means.  Be thankful I didn't list vacating WS titles in 1997, 2002, 2003, and 2004

If we simply can't live without the wildcard, I'd be prepared to cave a little on #1 -- wild card team gets no home games in first round, 1 home game in LCS, and 2 home games in WS.  Make it really hurt to finish a distant second.  Maybe that will inspire teams to try a little harder during the 162 game regular season.

#3 is the sticky one.  You can't have the first part without the second part.  Everybody has to do their part.

Full disclosure: none of these ideas originated with me.  They come from http://www.amazon.com/Fair-Ball-Fans-Case-Baseball/dp/0767904664/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1310351190&sr=8-1.  I just happen to agree with them and have added my own spin to them (actually #4 is my own, and is probably the most hair-brained one of them all).

[valpofan56]

I think the Wild Card in baseball is a great thing and overall leads to better playoff baseball.  Take this year for example, no one could make a reasonable argument that the two best teams in the AL are the Red Sox and the Yankees.  Why should one of those two teams who play in, by far, the toughest division in baseball, be jettisoned just because they didn't win their division.  The playoffs are better with both of those teams in than either one of them beating up on the winners of the very weak AL West and even weaker AL Central.

Not wanting a wild card is like wanting the BCS in college football. If Florida and Alabama, or Wisconsin and Ohio State, or Texas and Oklahoma are the best two teams in college football why would you want one of  them to eliminate the other in a conference championship game versus the national championship game?

[sectionee]

I wish MLB would dump the interleague play, make two divisions (AL and NL), and have the top 6 teams from each make the playoffs.  I'd also like to see the season either start a bit earlier or have the number of games reduced from 162 to 150ish to make room for the extra round of playoffs.

[valpotx]

OK, even though MLB rules, there are still some things to fix.  For instance:

1. eliminate the DH
2. keep instant replay, but for disputed home runs only
3. No more wild card teams, please!  One per league is enough; do not add another one per league
4. Schedule at least two World Series games during the day
5. No more interleague games (as fun as it is to watch Yanks/Cards, for example, for every series like that we are treated to a terrible matchup like, say, Diamondbacks v. Rays or Pirates v. Mariners).  Ugh!
6. Limit the roster of All-Star teams to 25 players for each league
7. get a real, independent commissioner
8. get rid of both Florida franchises; people down there support spring training baseball, but not regular season baseball.  it's true!

Paul

Paul

Very much on the opposite side of you in regards to the DH, probably because of being a Rangers/AL fan.  It is just so pitiful to watch a pitcher come to bat 99% of the time in the pros.  Every now and then you can actually get a decent-hitting pitcher, but it is just a waste of time to have the pitcher come up as basically an automatic out every time.  It helps lower your NL ERAs, but that is about it.  You can argue that you get some gamesmanship out of it due to pinch hitting or bunts, but it is so painful for me as a baseball player to watch someone whiff three straight times on pitches right down the middle without a chance of doing anything...

In regards to the AL West comment made by someone later on, the overall division is weaker this year, and does need the Astros added in so we have 5 teams.  However, I take the Rangers and Angels in a series versus the Yankees/Red Sox,  just as I did last year which turned out well  8)

[rlh]

OK, even though MLB rules, there are still some things to fix.  For instance:

1. eliminate the DH
2. keep instant replay, but for disputed home runs only
3. No more wild card teams, please!  One per league is enough; do not add another one per league
4. Schedule at least two World Series games during the day
5. No more interleague games (as fun as it is to watch Yanks/Cards, for example, for every series like that we are treated to a terrible matchup like, say, Diamondbacks v. Rays or Pirates v. Mariners).  Ugh!
6. Limit the roster of All-Star teams to 25 players for each league
7. get a real, independent commissioner
8. get rid of both Florida franchises; people down there support spring training baseball, but not regular season baseball.  it's true!

Paul

Paul

Very much on the opposite side of you in regards to the DH, probably because of being a Rangers/AL fan.  It is just so pitiful to watch a pitcher come to bat 99% of the time in the pros.  Every now and then you can actually get a decent-hitting pitcher, but it is just a waste of time to have the pitcher come up as basically an automatic out every time.  It helps lower your NL ERAs, but that is about it.  You can argue that you get some gamesmanship out of it due to pinch hitting or bunts, but it is so painful for me as a baseball player to watch someone whiff three straight times on pitches right down the middle without a chance of doing anything...

In regards to the AL West comment made by someone later on, the overall division is weaker this year, and does need the Astros added in so we have 5 teams.  However, I take the Rangers and Angels in a series versus the Yankees/Red Sox,  just as I did last year which turned out well  8)

I disagree about the DH...it should be abolished.  True, today's pitchers are not that good as hitters, but they don't grow up as hitters, not if they are only pitchers.  Back in the day, there were a lot of good hitters who also were pitchers...it's all a matter of practice.  Personally I like having to have the pitcher hit, it adds strategy to the game...but I don't think the DH is going away...even though I wish it would

[StlVUFan]

I think the Wild Card in baseball is a great thing and overall leads to better playoff baseball.  Take this year for example, no one could make a reasonable argument that the two best teams in the AL are the Red Sox and the Yankees.  Why should one of those two teams who play in, by far, the toughest division in baseball, be jettisoned just because they didn't win their division.  The playoffs are better with both of those teams in than either one of them beating up on the winners of the very weak AL West and even weaker AL Central.

Not wanting a wild card is like wanting the BCS in college football. If Florida and Alabama, or Wisconsin and Ohio State, or Texas and Oklahoma are the best two teams in college football why would you want one of  them to eliminate the other in a conference championship game versus the national championship game?

Why should any team strive with all their might to finish first in their division when they have the wild card to fall back on?  The wild card invites substandard regular season performance.

If the divisions are that wildly imbalanced, realign them so they are more balanced.  Weaker teams: get stronger.

Actually, I can very easily argue that the Red Sox and Yankees might not be the two best teams in the AL: they don't play the same schedule as everyone else.

Boo hoo.  You're the Red Sox or Yankees.  You know at the beginning of the year what your job is, and you have 162 games with which to get the job done.

It is not at all like the BCS.  162 games versus ... what, 12?  Give me a break.  A world of diffference.  162 games provides definitive proof who the best team in each division is.

See what I mean?  I hate Jay Bilas when it comes to College Basketball, but switch topics to MLB, and I become Jay Bilas.  I want the best team in each division to advance and that's it, because I want those teams to compete for the championship and no one else.

I also despise the Red Sox and Yankees with every fiber of my being.  The Wild Card was invented to try to preprogram an annual postseason with both teams involved.  It sickens me.

[valpotx]

So do you want all sports to do away with the wild card then?  Every major American sport has more teams making the playoffs than win their division.

[rlh]

The wildcard has increased interest (read that revenues) significantly in MLB, so there is no way...NO WAY....they are going to eliminate it.  The commish wants to add wild card teams....so you'll just have to live with it...personally, I like it, but we are all entitled to our opinion....based on your feelings, St. Louis wouldn't have won their last title, because if you only put the best in they wouldn't have qualified.....

[78crusader]

I have gotten used to the wild card, even though adopting it did away with the thrill of a down-to-the-wire pennant race (for those of you who enjoy reading about baseball, please take in "October 1964," by David Halberstam.  In this book Halberstam describes with much detail the 1964 NL pennant race, which came down to the very last day and involved three teams -- St. Louis, Philadelphia, and Cincinnati.  This was the race, by the way, in which the Phillies blew a 6 1/2 game lead with 10 to play).

Adding a second wild card is a bad idea.  It would render meaningless the Division title, which still means something in baseball.  Trying to generate interest during the last two weeks of the season for an  expanded wild card race ("watch the Padres take on the Brewers for an important game that could have implications as to which team makes the playoffs") would be a tough sell.  Trying to make interesting the wild card race is tough enough now as it is.  Trying to get people interested in who makes the SECOND wild card spot would be really hard.  Don't make MLB like the NBA or NHL or even the NFL.  Keep the number of teams to make the playoffs to 4 per league.

And...no more replay (besides disputed home run calls).  Bad calls are part of the game, and in the course of a 162-game season, things tend to even out.  It is a slippery slope -- once you allow teams to challenge calls on the basepaths or catches in the outfield, there would be no end in sight -- all the calls would be challenged.  This is why we have UMPIRES. 

Paul

ps By the way, October 1964 is the best baseball book I have ever read.

[valpo04]

I really don't understand the "the wild card invites substandard performance" argument.

Last year, the Yankees as the AL wild card had a better record than both the AL Central and AL West champs.  The Braves as the NL wild card winner had the same record as the NL Central winner.

In 2009, Boston as the wild card winner was a full 7.5 games better than the AL Central winning Twins, and Colorado finished with one more win than the NL Central winning Cardinals.

And if you look further back, I'm sure its more of the same.

You can say you dislike the wild card, but the argument that it "invites substandard performance" is silly.

As for the DH... the day you do away with lefty specialists out of the pen, or closers is the day you can do away with the DH.  If you can have a guy on your roster who can only pitch to one batter or who's only job is to get 3 outs in the 9th then there is no reason why you can't have a guy who's only job is to hit. 

The bottom line is that you pay pitchers to pitch, not to hit and I have no problem with that.

[StlVUFan]

So do you want all sports to do away with the wild card then?  Every major American sport has more teams making the playoffs than win their division.

Football has a small sample size for a regular season, so finishing first doesn't prove anything.  But yeah, I wouldn't mind it.  NHL and NBA have medium sample sizes.  I'm on the fence with them, but I'd still be in favor of it, yeah.

Absolutely.

[StlVUFan]

The wildcard has increased interest (read that revenues) significantly in MLB, so there is no way...NO WAY....they are going to eliminate it.  The commish wants to add wild card teams....so you'll just have to live with it...personally, I like it, but we are all entitled to our opinion....based on your feelings, St. Louis wouldn't have won their last title, because if you only put the best in they wouldn't have qualified.....

Yes they would have.  They finished in first place in their division.

Let me be clear: any discussion of "best" ends with me at the division level.  "Best in league" is irrelevant to me.

Of course it's never going to happen, not unless the whole of MLB has a brain fart and elects me commissioner for a day.  Of course I'll have to live with it.  Just don't ask me to like it.  Don't.  Not one bit.

I have never argued that the wild card wasn't successful.  Of course it is.  That's precisely the problem.  Not all things that are successful are good.  This one isn't, in my opinion.

[StlVUFan]

I really don't understand the "the wild card invites substandard performance" argument.

It's quite simple.  If you don't have to finish in first, then you don't have to go all out for a full 162.  You don't have to pull out all the stops.  If you're Phil Garner, you can piddle around until the middle of May at 15-30 and still make the postseason.  Meanwhile, if I'm Tony LaRussa putting peddle to the medal from Opening Day, what's my reward for finishing like a dozen games ahead of Houston?  A best of 7 series between myself and a team I lapped twice during a long grueling regular season, with no advantage whatsoever unless the series goes to 7 games.

Why should I bother trying to dominate my division if that's my reward?