|
|
The Daily Prospectus: Solving Competitive Imbalance
by Derek Zumsteg
My recent articles about competitive balance generated a ton of e-mail in which many people made reasoned, passionate, and most
of all intelligent arguments about why competitive balance is so important to them as fans of baseball.
I've been convinced. Baseball is entertainment, and what's more entertaining than parity?
So I solicited the other authors and with their help (particularly Keith Woolner's), I've assembled this list of sweeping
reforms that will guarantee the competitive balance I think we all can agree would be best for the game. Now, some of them run
into each other a little, but we're putting these out in the hopes that they'll generate new ideas and elevate the level of
discussion.
Revenue Sharing
Contracts, Drafting, Recruiting
Off-Season
Or, even more drastically, the competitive-balance draft could be made more progressive to help increase parity, so teams that
win between 78-84 games can't draft or be drafted from, but teams that win more games can protect fewer players, all the way up
to a 110-win team, which would only get to protect two players--total. Meanwhile, a 110-loss team could draft up to 10 players
for the following season. This makes the draft a much more powerful rebuilding tool, like it is in the NFL and NBA.
In-Season
That low scoring improves the ability of bad teams to compete has been proven in other sports: NBA teams have played
clock-bleeding strategies to keep the game close (and didn't the Cavaliers make a decent living off that for a while?).
Post-Season
Here's how you do it: each division sends a winner and a runner-up. Then we have two spots for either (depending on your taste)
the two teams with the best records still excluded or two teams selected at random from those teams excluded. It's like a
lottery, but this one would give every fan hope and faith in the pre-season, knowing that no matter how badly run their team is,
regardless of how much their team sucks, they still have a chance to make the playoffs.
Division winners would play the lotto picks, with the rest of the seedings determined by win-loss records (or heck, why not
current payroll, 1 vs 2, 3 vs 4, and so on?).
In the coming weeks, we're going to explore each of these areas in more detail, including staff roundtables on how to best
implement each set of solutions and how to work out the drawbacks some of these plans carry.
I should also offer my sincere apologies for railing for so long on the competitive balance issue. As Mayor Quimby once said,
"If that is the way the wind is blowing, let no-one say that I do not also blow."
Derek Zumsteg is an author of Baseball Prospectus. You can contact him by
clicking here.
|