MLB Gap Problems

The issue is that Revenue isn't really tied to performance anymore because most of the money comes from cable tv (which are fixed payout  long term contracts and not tied to tv ratings) so a half empty stadium doesn't really hurt the owners that much. Also teams became smarter with giving long contracts to 30+ year old guys, you don't give 200m to a 30 yo hitter anymore who will make you better the first 3 years of the contract and then is pretty much useless the last 5-6 years and also the promise of rebuild keeps the fans happy because they hope for a better future which is something people love.

To be fair the full rebuild model (wouldn't even call it tanking) worked pretty well (Astros, cubs, braves) but when too many teams do it it becomes less effective because prospect prices go up (Don't get as much of a haul anymore) and only so many teams can win the WS.

Another issue is that front offices are smarter, now every idiot can calculate aging curves and prospect surplus value and projections are widely available. This makes trades and signings pretty boring because everyone knows how much it will be. This used to be much more entertaining when dumb GMs like Dave Stewart were around who would make dumb trades. Sabermetrics made the game more exiting but when everyone does  it there is a stalemate. The best time was really the time when only like a third of the front offices were smart and exploiting the dumb ones.

But of course you can't expect front offices take the blue pill and pretend they are dumb away so that isn't something that can be resolved.

They should go to even caps for every teams, that would make small market teams more competitive against larger open pocket ones.  Also going to 7 innings would make the games shorter and more compact so scores, hits, strikeouts are more meaning full.  And definitely tie revenue to performance by teams as well as players.

I first had my suggestion for basketball when the SIxers were obviously tanking. It would discourage tanking in any sport. A team can’t draft within five picks of their previous season draft pick. 

If a team has the worst record once they get the top pick. The next year the best they can do is 6th. The next year the best they can do is 11th. And so on ....

The current disparity in talent is making the standings top and bottom heavy. Normally, 95 wins clinches a division. This year in the American League it leaves the team out of the post season. 

RJM posted:

I first had my suggestion for basketball when the SIxers were obviously tanking. It would discourage tanking in any sport. A team can’t draft within five picks of their previous season draft pick. 

If a team has the worst record once they get the top pick. The next year the best they can do is 6th. The next year the best they can do is 11th. And so on ....

The current disparity in talent is making the standings top and bottom heavy. Normally, 95 wins clinches a division. This year in the American League it leaves the team out of the post season. 

With the NBA draft being only two round it matters more. But I was thinking something along the same lines. A pretty big fine for more than 95 losses, picks fall X spots in each round if you lose more than 100. Something that prevents teams from being a joke each year. 

I know revenue is up, cable numbers are great, and little league is getting back into form, but turn on any MLB game and a homerun is hit into a section with 0 people. I think that's pretty embarrassing, especially when it ends up on every highlight. 

The MLB draft is more of a crap shoot than other sports. But picking in the top five is mostly grabbing can’t miss prospects. Teams shouldn’t be allowed to load up with top five picks year after year.