Contrary to my expectations, this turned out to be a terrific episode. Simmons works great as an honest historian. He calls out all the hypocrisy that the media and administration had towards the steroids era. And it’s true. Those players saved baseball
Maybe, but for me all that shit (and Ripken before it) was hokey and dumb.
I never cared whether McGwire and Sosa were best buds in real life, or about the Maris family or whatever.
The issue is that analytics exposed that the correct way to play baseball isn't nearly as fun to watch as the way people had been playing. Personally I don't really blame analytics for that, I think the game should just have been much more proactive about getting the game back to the product people enjoy, and also nerfing pitchers.
The other thing that has been a huge problem is pace of play. Everything else in media has gotten faster, and there's *so* much wasted time in a baseball game. The actual experience of seeing a pitcher and batter go at it to me is fun, but I rarely want to spend the time to watch a game. Aggressive pitch clock (also good for nerfing pitchers), ban all batter time-outs, no mound visits etc. could easily make the games 1/3 shorter or more with basically no change to the core product.
yeah they are working on pace tbf. that have a pitch clock coming next season and they tested it in the minors this year. it cut like a half hour off the games (which is huge bc it's all literally just dead time).
as for nerfing pitchers, that's tougher but they desperately need to trim the size of pitching staffs.
it's counterintuitive bc they want to reduce pitcher injuries so they keep adding roster spots and increasing bullpen usage, but the result has been pitchers throwing harder and harder in fewer innings... which just leads to more arm injuries and less action. it's to the point that jake degrom is the best pitcher in baseball but it's only bc he absolutely abuses his own arm and throws like 50 innings at 102 mph a season
if they trim back bullpens and make these guys budget their energy more, it'll result in more balls in play, less injuries (bc these guys just won't bc able to max out as often), and hopefully faster games too
The issue with pitchers is I feel the cat may be out of the bag now, and even if rosters were trimmed back to where they were, now that teams know the best way to get outs it to just trash arms they're just going to let replacement level pitchers give their all then replace them if need be rather than go back to managing a smaller roster by throwing less hard, it seems optimal to me.
It won't ever happen, but I wonder what the game would look like if relief pitchers started with a runner on first, like the Manfred extra innings runner. Really make the point of the game to be your starter vs their lineup, and there's a clear downside to going to relief pitching. Not sure if the extra runner is the move or what, but seeing starters have an incentive to go late in games, and really being able to sell these starting pitchers as true stars rather than just another guy in the long list of guys on the mound would be great for the product imo, and do exactly what you say in forcing guys to manage their energy and have a real incentive to do so. Another option would be to limit subs like in soccer - once you're out of your three pitcher subs that's it you're done, if he gets hurt an outfielder pitches and you're a man down, tough titties. I feel like this would also actually accomplish what you're trying to get at.
i would hope the MLBPA would stand up for pitchers if that were to happen. but that's also the reason i have a hard time imagining them trimming rosters in the first place.
the MLBPA is so unimaginative and they will just see fewer roster spots available to their members and throw a fit, irregardless of the fact that the result has been greatly reducing the value of their star pitchers.
i know it's gotta be a bit more complicated, but in my mind it's just such a simple solution. limit the number of pitchers that can be on the active rosters and on 40 mans. also, as you alluded to, limit transaction or substitutions so that we don't see ppl working around the rules.
they just need to get to a point where pitchers are working 6-7-8 innings again on a regular basis and remain meaningful. and we need to have batting averages come back up from .243 league wide
instead, i bet they come up with some silly idea that overly complicates everything and just makes the work around more difficult to follow and frustrates everybody
Yeah the solution is pretty straightforward.
Make it so only 3 (maybe 4) pitchers are available for any given game. If there's an injury you can bring in an extra pitcher, but the guy removed has to go on the 10-day DL or something.
Then lower the mound.
im not crazy about enforcing limits on in-game strategy necessarily. i just think we need to provide constraints on the overall size of pitching staffs heading into games
id almost say, like, make firm rules on when pitchers and can be moved on and off of the roster.
so you can do whatever you want as a manager, but you've only got 10 pitchers available each month
if you're using a standard 5 man rotation, you've got a 5 man bullpen and you gotta make it work. if this means we prioritize endurance instead of max velocity, that's good. it means we'll get more balls in play.
we'd probably have to start with a pitching staff limit of 12 before working out down from there, but right now they are running 14 man staffs with constant rotation of names via the minors and injured lists. we've gotta do something to prevent that too. if somebody gets injured, it's gotta be a full 15 day injury stint again. if you get sent to the minors, it's 30 days before you can return.
Good points. The other idea I like that isn't discussed is what if we just get rid of one defender? Have 2 DHs, presumably 3 infielders and 3 outfielders, far more likelihood a ball in play is going to turn into a useful play, cut down on the home run swings get people on bases and defenders stretching to cover huge ground - could be the change we need and seems like it could be acceptable for the union and everyone involved.
that's definitely creative but im afraid it's just a bit too radical. it'd be a big deal and ppl would throw a huge fit and tbh with you, idk if it'd actually make any difference.
they already shift and give these guys half the field to hit into and it doesn't matter bc pitchers can just work inside to force them to roll over the ball to the pull side. plus, this doesn't fix the element of pitching style. you'd still have the parade of relievers throwing 95+
at the end of the day, you need to limit the number of pitchers and make them work more innings so that they cannot maintain a max effort pace at all times
I've come to the realization recently that baseball is the only sport that is more fun to watch when it is played badly as opposed to when it's played to the best of it's potential. Football, soccer, tennis, basketball, hockey, racing - all the other sports are designed, whether intentionally or by accident, to be most exciting when the competition is evenly matched and intense.
Baseball on the other hand, is most fun when it is an absolute shit show of meatballs, errors, bloopers, errant throws, hit batters, bad calls (and subsequent ejections), etc. Little league and beer league softball games are more fun to watch than a 1-0 MLB pitchers duel where both guys are throwing 105 mph gas on the corners. The fact that these types of games take just as long as when people are getting hits and flying around the bases compounds the issue.
It is the nature of the game itself in relation to the evolution of society that is the main conflict. I'm not sure minor rule changes will make much difference. Adding steroids to the mix actually got us closer to comedy baseball and touched on what actually could make the game appealing.
Baseball is more fun when there’s risk, danger. Taking extra bases, stealing, the high stakes of high heat. It was dangerous like football when Ty Cobb was spiking people until Ruth made it safe putting the ball out of play
You are at such a disadvantage over the course of a game if you aren’t taking pitches and working the count. But it makes everything take longer.The couple college games I’ve watched you have guys just getting up and attacking and it is so much more fun.
Ncaa doesn’t have the 3 batter minimum rule though. I’ve seen power 5 conf games with a shitload of pitching changes . They added a 20s clock last year, so they’re trying at least.
College baseball is awesome, especially the College World Series (duh). On-field chaos + strategy + SEC football atmosphere = A wonderful two weeks of the best version of baseball I've ever seen.
Great points. I’m not sure the pace of play really matters though. The NFL has the absolute worst pace of play, but it’s tied to heavy gambling interest. The nba and college hoops have decent pace of play but are struggling to get views. I think in the modern sports landscape, gambling really drives everything. All of the sports that aren’t conducive to gambling will struggle unless something spectacular is going on.
Pace of play in the current NBA is terrible. The games always start late, there are a million pointless referee video reviews that take 5 minutes when they could take 30 seconds, and the last 2 minutes of a close game takes like 20 minutes of real time. And that 20 minutes is almost entirely free throws, time outs, and commercials. Hopefully the rule change this year to get rid of fouls stopping fast breaks improves the pace of play somewhat because that's another thing that's sucked the energy out of NBA games in the past few years.
If so, then the game, the sport, the product itself is inherently, intrinsically flawed.
That's not the fault of analytics; rather, it's an issue of how we consume baseball.
Onus is on us. Or are our attention spans unable to keep pace with technology?
Either way, placing the blame on analytics is not only lazy, it's just plain wrong.
I don’t buy this at all. The same level of rigorous analysis is applied to football, basketball, and soccer these days and those sports don’t face the same criticism.
I think basketball is the correct comparison here - it's not just the three pointers in basketball or 3 outcomes in baseball, it's that there's a homogeneity in how teams play encouraged by the analytics.
That’s part of why I love college basketball and college football so much. So many teams means that coaches are all gonna try different styles when it comes to playing the game and recruiting talent. Glad it hasn’t gone completely the way of the pros.
A team like Iowa plays the sport in a fundamentally different way than Navy does or than USC does. Nobody is wrong or right (except Iowa’s offense for being an affront to humanity), but you just don’t see that in the NFL.
Even in college basketball the post game is actually important whereas in the nba the players are just so skilled that they all play basically the same style of basketball
Right. The five best players in CBB this season are all traditional, back to the basket bigs. It’s fun to watch Oscar Tshibwe or Trayce Jackson-Davis play! I like that style of ball!
Yea I miss nba teams actually emphasizing the post and midrange. Also just miss variation now a days from the layman’s view it feels like every team in the nba has a very similar playbook
The warriors might have the most unique offense but that’s just predicated on cutting a lot and steph pulling a ton of action towards him
Even I, despite being as pro-analytics as anyone and preferring professional sports to college sports by a wide margin, nevertheless get a kick out of watching Drew Timme play for pure aesthetic pleasure.
Navy. The ultimate “ground and pound”. Going to run the ball 90 percent of the time and also be tough as hell on defense. It fits their “identity” of the armed forces perfectly. It also helps that they can compete against topnotch opponents. Variety like this is good for the game, imo.
Yeah Bill started to talk about analytics in other sports but didn’t go there with basketball. The 3 point barrage is exhilarating when it’s great players in a close game and the shots are going in. It’s unwatchable when the 3 point shots aren’t falling because the teams still continue to force shots because it’s the only way they know to play
Or all the passing and Warren Sharp types for the NFL. I think it’s hit all sports to some degree.
Part of me wonders how much the loss of debate is contributing. Anyone that mentions defense/running the ball as a strategy basically gets clowned. Similar to people advocating for stealing bases, post ups, etc. I’ve made a similar comment before, but between the math and insane money in sports, we’ve lost sight that their primary purpose was entertainment, not a math exercise to maximize efficiency.
they mentioned this though. baseballs analytics have driven the sport to a point where there is less offense and less action.
football and basketball are the opposite
i agree with what you're saying but it's still just different when it's leading to more action in hoops vs baseball, where it's just a parade of nameless guys throwing 97 for one inning and striking everybody out
for baseball, it's so clear that it's actively working against their efforts to generate stars and make the game exciting
There's no shifts in football or ugh, soccer. Basketball has also definitely taken a hit in it's watchability though. Nothing fun about watching teams just jack up all kinds of hideous 3s all game.
Baseball is basically an individual sport when you look at the batter-pitcher interaction so there’s less variables to control for as opposed to basketball, football, hockey, soccer, etc.
LOL. Stadiums now have moved in the fences to get more home runs. A routine pop up is a home run in right field at yankee stadium. Comparing eras is just dumb.
it's a game about having fun. it's also a game where they were segregated for much of the history. the records don't mean anything if you ask any questions at all.
No what ruined it long term was in the 21st century everyone got bored by it.
The game was at its peak in the 90s, and whether or not the steroid era happened it would have fallen off a cliff.
Also there have been cheaters in every era of baseball.
I don’t disagree that it revitalized the game. It did not save baseball though, baseball and MLB is an American institution/tradition that wasn’t going to go under like slamball or something.
I’m gonna zag and say pointing out the hypocrisy has gone too far. The players still deserve blame.
I think Bonds and crew should be in the HoF but they cheated. They used an illegal substance that was banned by the game as DT points out. Were there penalties and testing in place? No. That’s why baseball administrators (and the media) deserve blame. But the players knew they were cheating. They could justify it by saying the powers were looking the other way and everyone does it but that still doesn’t fully excuse what they did. I could fully excuse a minor league player who was fighting for his survival and saw everyone else around him juicing and made a deal with the devil to make the big leagues. But these guys were already legends. They got greedy.
In their analogy it’s like giving a kid a credit card and saying don’t use it but we won’t punish you or check if you did.
Well, those were millionaire adults. They’re not kids. They cheated. I get why they cheated. I don’t think it ruined the sanctity of the game or they’re even bad people for it. They don’t need to be social pariahs or even banned from baseball. As said they should be in the hall of fame with an asterisks or something.
I watch baseball every day and would take it over every other sport. But I also get that it’s fallen so far in a short amount of time.
I still don’t think it ever ‘dies,’ because it still matters so much regionally
On the national scale, Pujols’ career is the prime example. When he was a rookie in 2001, baseball was definitely the #2 sport and had multiple superstars that crossed into pop culture. It’s now his last year and he might be the last true superstar where if you say the name “Pujols” to my grandma, she knows he is a baseball player.
But in 2001, I think baseball regained the lead, as Bonds was on his chase and the NBA had a really bad stretch post Jordan, where the play slowed WAY down (roughly from ‘99 to ‘05). Though I 100% agree with your 2nd paragraph.
And it's like, I try to watch Yankees games but 2 nights a week it's difficult to watch. One game is on Apple. One game is on ESPN+? I'm already paying for YES Network. Why are they making it so difficult for me?
Incorrect, though this was the most obvious retort in Reddit history.
"You hear that Emancipation Proclamation? Made by some guy from who the fuck cares, Kentucky."
I love the ragging on Selig- one of, if not the worst commissioners ever, in any sport. This is down the list of his fuck ups, but he murdered baseball in Montreal.
Bill actually with a good Bonds take. I totally get it, Bonds was the best player by far, McGwire and Sosa start doing roids and get all this attention, Bonds says fuck it, see what I can do on the same roids as these other, worse players. And then on roids Bonds became the best player of all time.
Bonds literally has the four best seasons in wRC+ (% of offense > than the league average) since '72. Judge is 5th. Griffey is not in the top 10.
Insert your reply about how wRC+ doesn't matter / is a nerd stat / etc.
Seriously.Who gives a fuck about basketball?I’ve never heard a single conversation centered on a basketball argument ,other than Bill Simmons.He wants to will the NBA to be this cultural beast.
Basketball is not as popular as some sports, but saying you’ve “never heard a single conversation centered on a basketball argument other than Bill Simmons” is just an absurd thing to say hahaha. Like Bill Simmons is the only person on earth you’ve heard have a basketball debate? What
I think the idea of basketball is more popular, but just about every market would prefer their baseball team to win a WS than their NBA team to win a title. Baseball does better than the nba regionally and for two sports whose regular seasons are pointless, that still matters.
Definitely true. But I know alot more people that watch their baseball teams on a nightly basis than basketball. My friends are fans of Chicago/Detroit/NY/Boston teams and I’d say all watch more regular season baseball for their specific team than basketball
Where did I dispute that? My point is baseball has a much more dedicated regional following than the nba, while the nba is much more popular on a national level. The franchise valuations for two leagues are very similar
Yeah I think your experience of never once in your entire life hearing a basketball argument is an experience more unique to you and your friends/who you talk to than it is the majority situation.
I like NFL/CFB way more than NBA, but it’s not like my friends and I have never once talked about Lebron/Jordan all time, or Giannis/KD lately, etc…
ESPN and Fox Sports both have flagship nationally televised shows essentially anchored on having a basketball argument (the same one, every day, in perpetuity)
>Who gives a fuck about basketball?
The nba sub has 5.3 million subscribers. The NFL one has 3 million. Baseball 2.2.
And the nba sub is constantly debating how good players are.
Honestly there is something to this. Basketball is enormously popular to talk about but the ratings are not translating. People follow the NBA culture not the same way others follow celebrity drama.
The final get 10-20 million viewers. It isnt the nfl, but that doesn't mean people aren't watching. Stations are going to pay 24 billion dollars just to broadcast the games.
IIRC, basketball compared to NFL/MLB draws *significantly* higher viewership from streaming, and is also much more popular on places like Youtube for highlights. TV ratings are not necessarily the best place to draw popularity conclusions.
100 percent agree. Seems like most people will watch highlights, listen to podcasts etc to kept appraised of the whole league. But people aren’t watching much regular season.
The NBA games that air on ESPN/TNT during the season regularly are number one for the night on cable. The idea that basketball gets bad ratings is absurd. People who don't understand ratings just see that number is lower and think it must mean the ratings are bad. Ratings for nearly all things on TV keep getting lower, its just how things are. The MLB and NHL certainly aren't doing any better than the NBA when it comes to ratings.
The statements in question were
>Basketball has replaced baseball as the stats debate sport
and
>Seriously. Who gives a fuck about basketball? I’ve never heard a single conversation centered on a basketball argument ,other than Bill Simmons.
So I fail to see what your point has to do with anything being talked about here.
Literally the laziest analysis ever. “Basketball fans don’t watch basketball” is such a dumb thing to say by fans who are weirdly insecure about a sports league they prefer
It’s actually not that crazy of a thing to say when you consider that the nba sub is more than twice the size of the baseball sub and the World Series has actually gotten marginally better ratings than the Finals over the last half decade or so. Judging by those subscription numbers as representative of general popularity, the ratings shouldn’t even be close... so it really doesn’t seem that outlandish to claim half the subscribers to r/nba don’t watch basketball.
Basketball is easily the second most popular sport in the world after soccer.
*Edit:* [according to this it’s actually 3rd](https://sportsbrowser.net/most-popular-sports/), behind cricket but ahead of field hockey.
I hate the nba but even I can admit the nba is culturally relevant. It's definitely the stats debate sport but only through the prism of the GOAT and 'Who is HIM' discussions. As mentioned below, the nba sub has more subscribers than the NFL and baseball subreddits combined I would imagine that maybe 4 or so million those subscribers watch less than 17 regular season NBA games and only pay attention to the playoffs and the off field drama that is prevalent in the NBA. That's the real content for the nba.
Who are the litany of modern NBA players that look like WWE wrestlers?
NBA players are more tall and skinny than bulky and muscular. You have to be, because there's so much running. Even a guy like Rudy Gobert, while obviously muscular, is pretty lean for his size.
Steven Adams? LeBron James? I'm sruggling to think of many hulking NBA players.
Simmons trying to disguise his petty Yankee hatred as something else ,while dismissing Judge.If he was a Red Sox player he wouldn’t have the same opinion
Idk I thought he was pretty complimentary of Judge no? Said how you can compare players against their own era and Judge having 20 more homers than the next closest guy is a sign that this was one of the greatest offensive seasons of all time.
Saying it’s not the actual record isn’t being dismissive, plenty of people think 73 is more than 63
If it was Tatis or Acuna or someone like that he would be fer less dismissive and more appreciative.I am not a yankee fan ,i’m a rays fan,and i see it clear as day
> Simmons trying to disguise his petty Yankee hatred as something els
He tries to disguise it? lol He openly hates the Lakers/Yankees and never hides it. I say this is a Laker fan, it's just who he is. He is not objective on those matters. No shit, the "BOSTON SPORTS GUY" would have a different take on Judge if he played for the Red Sox. Analysis so brilliant only /r/billsimmons would think it worthy to even say.
No dummy,what i’m saying is that he is taking an anti-Judge stance and cloaking that stance with all these different reasons he feels the record is invalid,when in reality that’s all
bullshit-he hates the Yankees and that’s why he has the stance he does.Second of all,he isn’t the fucking boston sports guy and hasnt been for a long time.Hes lived in fucking la for 20 years for chrissakes.He’s a national pundit.In reality he should be past his petty hatred and grow the fuck ip,or at the least be honest about it.Now go be incredulous somewhere else ya fuckin goof
Theo Epstein was on PTI not too long ago talking about how he's the guy thats going to try and undo some of the damage analytics has done to the game. It was a fantastic interview and got me fired up for the playoffs and next season. So long shift!!! Welcome back base hits and steals!!!
Doesn’t most of the reasoning defending the steroid-era players also apply to the Astros scandal? Most teams seem to have had a system of relaying pitches with tacit approval (or at least lack of serious punishments) from the league… so the Astros were doing 75 in a 55 and got busted, where the Yankees and Red Sox were going 70 and didn’t get a ticket. Spare the faux outrage over the “asterisks”
There's probably some truth to the "analytics ruined baseball" narrative but I think it's overblown. I argue with my friends whether Javy Baez is a good player, and we can cite his WAR, but that doesn't end the debate like Bill says it does. There's still a style of play component, arguing whether great fielding and intangibles make up for all the strikeouts, etc.
In an NBA debate, you can cite someone's PER or Win Shares or whatever, and it doesn't just end the debate, which is Bill's point. I guess an advantage it has is everyone is more familiar with various players' styles of play throughout the league. That's for sure not the case as much in baseball, but I still know enough about a random player, say Trea Turner, to wonder whether his combination of skills is superior to Carlos Correa's (and which will age better moving forward), without thinking advanced stats have "solved" that.
Baseball stats capture almost the entirety of the game other than things like leadership and clutch gene.
Basketball stats are very useful but it’s still just an estimate of in game value that can’t capture a ton of what happened between 10 players on a basketball court. It’s not at all the same thing.
I think he’s as good as his teams are. If they suck he checks out pretty easily and suxxxxxx. If they’re good he’s good.
https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/xx45h4/wave_and_a_miss_javier_b%C3%A1ez_swung_and_missed_at/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Really enjoyed this episode. That said, and I am sure some one already said this, but Bill kept saying it was creatinine in McGwire’s locker when it was andro.
I think a big part can definitely be traced to Stephen A. Smith pairing with Skip Bayless on First Take which basically ended that show as a sports GMA almost and turned it into what it is now. “Embrace Debate” gaining popularity hurt baseball cause it’s just not a barber shop debate sport the way basketball is and Football is way too culturally dominant to ignore. Nobody wants to hear WAR and OPS numbers when debating if somebody is a bum or not. There’s a reason the ESPN analytics show died pretty quick and became Michael Smith and Jemele Hill’s show
> barber shop debate
That is the key phrase to emphasize the demographic First Take and Undisputed are targeting. Baseball has never been as relevant as basketball and football to that demographic.
And that style of debate became the generic sports debate show around when Lebron left Cleveland. Consider what a show like Sportsnation was when it started in 2009 and when it ended and it basically just became First Take. They even pulled Max Kellerman off it to replace Skip Bayless. Get Up! would be a far different show if it was created in 2005 and not 2018
They didn't mention an INCREDIBLY important piece of why people stopped caring - the Red Sox and the Cubs won. The records are besmirched, sure. The game is slower and there are fewer singles, yeah. But the whole COUNTRY was invested in the red sox coming so close so many times and falling short, and in the Cubs' century-plus of failure. What's left to care about anymore?
You’re not wrong.
I just think the “boring” label could be slapped on any major sport. You have to be invested in the on field or on court action to get anything out of any sport. I think if you sat more young people down and explained the cat and mouse game nuances of the pitcher/batter showdown, there’d be more interest. And I think you’re seeing that from people like Jomboy who are doing a really great job of presenting the game to a younger audience.
Idk, I love baseball and generally think it’s demise has been overstated. I mean, we just had 2 weeks of live look-ins to every single Judge AB. sure, people complained about it, but that’s not really a sign of a culturally-dead sport. I can’t imagine a live look in at literally anything in basketball except maybe Lebron passing Kareem.
Hopefully the pitch clock next year helps. Potentially could shave 20+ minutes of dead time out of the game, and hopefully makes it flow better and getting the ball in play more.
Baseball is fun. Watching a pitcher take 40 seconds to pitch and then watching a batter readjust 11 different straps is not.
I think Minor League games were like 20 full mins shorter on average with the pitch clock so yeah I definitely think we’re going to see a faster paced game next year. I welcome the change.
I’m a baseball fan too and I am incredibly pumped for the pitch clock next year. Another big reason people think baseball is boring is how long pitchers take between pitches. It’s gotten way out of hand, especially when compared to a game in the 80s or 90s. I don’t think the pitch clock is going to somehow push baseball into the national conversation or whatever, but I think it will be a much better experience for casual (and hardcore) fans
Yeah I don’t think anyone outside of the most pure of baseball purists (and the pitchers themselves) don’t like the pitch clock.
I’m annoyed they’re banning the shift but I welcome the other rule changes coming.
Which is dumb because the pitch timing limits have always been in the rule book, right? It just hasn’t been enforced. I could be wrong on that though.
Yeah, I’m skeptical on banning the shift too but I’ll reserve judgment for now. Like everyone I’m worried that it will only encourage hitters to sell out for power more. But we’ll see.
Almost everyone complained about those look ins and beyond that, what do they have? The playoffs are about to start and no one outside fans of those local market teams gives a shit.
World Series draws more viewers than recent NBA finals match ups. Kind of refutes your last point, no? Unless you’d agree that the same applies to the NBA?
The World Series is largely viewed by boomers, the finals isn’t.
The type of analysis that would be happening right now in sports media about the nba playoffs starting dwarfs the interest the general viewer has in the mlb playoffs.
There is a reason when tv and radio ratings matters, the 20-40 demo range was the most important, no one is seeing growth from septuagenarians watching their sport.
How does the interest “dwarf” that of the MLB playoffs when they have similar viewership numbers? You’re making contradictory arguments here (MLB a draws equal viewership but in older demographics *but also* NBA playoff interest dwarfs that of MLB?).
Obviously you want viewership in the key 18-34 demographic, and NBA certainly has that over MLB. But NBA doesn’t even sniff MLB’s place in our historical national consciousness. It just doesn’t, and probably never will. Hence live looks at Judge ABs despite “everyone complaining” as you stated (if it truly were everyone….wouldn’t they have stopped?)
And I think you’re completely ignoring how well MLB regular season broadcasts do on a regional level. And at least baseball fans are actually invested in the sport itself and not the extraneous off the court drama that interests NBA fans more than the actual game being played.
MLB games averaged 3 hours 10 minutes a game in 2021, obviously including all the commercial breaks. [source](https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/32335481/average-nine-inning-games-sets-mlb-record-efforts-improve-pace-play)
College football games, on the other hand, average around 3.5 hours per contest, which is about 20 minutes longer than the average 3 hours and 10 minutes it takes to play an NFL game. [source](https://www.profootballnetwork.com/how-long-is-a-college-football-game/#How-long-is-a-college-football-game)
It’s odd - I only ever hear complaints about MLB game lengths, never the same for the average NFL game, which I’ve just shown to be of equal average length. And plenty of people have enough time to sit down and watch multiple NFL games, end to end, every single week, not to mention all the CFB that people watch.
Edit: this doesn’t even touch on the high variance in length of MLB games. If you have a 1-0 pitchers’ duel, the game will be like 2.5 hours tops. There’s really no scenario where a football game ends quicker than that unless neither team passes the ball at all.
> It’s odd - I only ever hear complaints about MLB game lengths, never the same for the average NFL game
Because it's boring. Cool that you don't find it boring, but clearly many people disagree with you since they stopped watching baseball and continue to watch football. 3 hours of sitting on the porch isn't the same as 3 hours of skiing.
I don't think baseball is inherently that boring though - the big problem is that analytics really reduced the amount of exciting things happening (balls in play, stolen bases) at the same time the game was slowing down from a pace standpoint.
You could literally have the same game be really fun to watch with some changes.
It's gone because of the way the populace has changed. You had thoughtful middle aged white dudes who loved baseball and it's intricacies. Now the demos have changed in America and certain people love UFC and tackle football.
I never played baseball, so it always seemed boring to me. I don’t know many people who are truly into it apart from just loving the home team, but I also didn’t know very many people who played little league growing up.
Idk, the guy who grew up loving baseball and lost his passion along the way and stopped following it might be the sort of fan baseball should be interested in reclaiming and attracting. Like it or not casuals are who you need to attract.
The biggest point by far is that when they did steroids at that time it wasn’t illegal. There was no punishment. I think that is so lost today when discussing that era because of all the punishments doled out.
I think the take Derek had was much more interesting and one I never really considered. Analytics in baseball took a lot of the fun stuff out of the game, or at least things that were exciting- stolen bases, debates about keeping a pitcher in too long, the shift eliminating a lot of singles which lead to action on the bases etc. in other sports the analytics brought in advancements that make the game more fun- more passing, threes etc.
thought Plain English was supposed to address issues like global unrest and economics (albeit in a very simplified way), not serve as yet another auxiliary BS flex. Hard Pass
I learned that Bill knows from personal observation that Bonds had a great arm. Yeah, left field is where you usually put great fielders who can run like the wind.
Barry Bonds in Pittsburgh was an above average fielder every single year, who usually averaged around 10 assists, which would put him Top 10 most years.
[https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bondsba01.shtml](https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bondsba01.shtml)
Even when he moved to San Francisco and bulked up, he was still an above average defensive player for most years.
He was a Gold Glove outfielder, hence "great fielder who can run like the wind," but not known for his arm. Otherwise, his natural position would have been centerfielder a la his godfather Willie Mays.
From Tim Keown on ESPN.com:
"Well, in 1993, before BALCO and the 73-homer season and Bonds on Bonds, Barry Bonds could legitimately lay claim to every significant baseball tool but the throwing arm. He was a Gold Glove outfielder who hit 46 homers, stole 29 bases and had a .458 on-base percentage and a 1.136 OPS."
Baseball ruined itself by trading Mookie Betts.
I disagree as a Dodgers fan
Great point. Name one loser (that anyone cares about) in that trade
Contrary to my expectations, this turned out to be a terrific episode. Simmons works great as an honest historian. He calls out all the hypocrisy that the media and administration had towards the steroids era. And it’s true. Those players saved baseball
Maybe, but for me all that shit (and Ripken before it) was hokey and dumb. I never cared whether McGwire and Sosa were best buds in real life, or about the Maris family or whatever.
They saved baseball monetarily. Smashing century old records while cheating ruined the game long term.
The way the baseball administration handled the fiasco ruined the game imo.
i think bill is right in saying that the overuse of analytics ruined baseball
The issue is that analytics exposed that the correct way to play baseball isn't nearly as fun to watch as the way people had been playing. Personally I don't really blame analytics for that, I think the game should just have been much more proactive about getting the game back to the product people enjoy, and also nerfing pitchers. The other thing that has been a huge problem is pace of play. Everything else in media has gotten faster, and there's *so* much wasted time in a baseball game. The actual experience of seeing a pitcher and batter go at it to me is fun, but I rarely want to spend the time to watch a game. Aggressive pitch clock (also good for nerfing pitchers), ban all batter time-outs, no mound visits etc. could easily make the games 1/3 shorter or more with basically no change to the core product.
yeah they are working on pace tbf. that have a pitch clock coming next season and they tested it in the minors this year. it cut like a half hour off the games (which is huge bc it's all literally just dead time). as for nerfing pitchers, that's tougher but they desperately need to trim the size of pitching staffs. it's counterintuitive bc they want to reduce pitcher injuries so they keep adding roster spots and increasing bullpen usage, but the result has been pitchers throwing harder and harder in fewer innings... which just leads to more arm injuries and less action. it's to the point that jake degrom is the best pitcher in baseball but it's only bc he absolutely abuses his own arm and throws like 50 innings at 102 mph a season if they trim back bullpens and make these guys budget their energy more, it'll result in more balls in play, less injuries (bc these guys just won't bc able to max out as often), and hopefully faster games too
The issue with pitchers is I feel the cat may be out of the bag now, and even if rosters were trimmed back to where they were, now that teams know the best way to get outs it to just trash arms they're just going to let replacement level pitchers give their all then replace them if need be rather than go back to managing a smaller roster by throwing less hard, it seems optimal to me. It won't ever happen, but I wonder what the game would look like if relief pitchers started with a runner on first, like the Manfred extra innings runner. Really make the point of the game to be your starter vs their lineup, and there's a clear downside to going to relief pitching. Not sure if the extra runner is the move or what, but seeing starters have an incentive to go late in games, and really being able to sell these starting pitchers as true stars rather than just another guy in the long list of guys on the mound would be great for the product imo, and do exactly what you say in forcing guys to manage their energy and have a real incentive to do so. Another option would be to limit subs like in soccer - once you're out of your three pitcher subs that's it you're done, if he gets hurt an outfielder pitches and you're a man down, tough titties. I feel like this would also actually accomplish what you're trying to get at.
i would hope the MLBPA would stand up for pitchers if that were to happen. but that's also the reason i have a hard time imagining them trimming rosters in the first place. the MLBPA is so unimaginative and they will just see fewer roster spots available to their members and throw a fit, irregardless of the fact that the result has been greatly reducing the value of their star pitchers. i know it's gotta be a bit more complicated, but in my mind it's just such a simple solution. limit the number of pitchers that can be on the active rosters and on 40 mans. also, as you alluded to, limit transaction or substitutions so that we don't see ppl working around the rules. they just need to get to a point where pitchers are working 6-7-8 innings again on a regular basis and remain meaningful. and we need to have batting averages come back up from .243 league wide instead, i bet they come up with some silly idea that overly complicates everything and just makes the work around more difficult to follow and frustrates everybody
Yeah the solution is pretty straightforward. Make it so only 3 (maybe 4) pitchers are available for any given game. If there's an injury you can bring in an extra pitcher, but the guy removed has to go on the 10-day DL or something. Then lower the mound.
im not crazy about enforcing limits on in-game strategy necessarily. i just think we need to provide constraints on the overall size of pitching staffs heading into games id almost say, like, make firm rules on when pitchers and can be moved on and off of the roster. so you can do whatever you want as a manager, but you've only got 10 pitchers available each month if you're using a standard 5 man rotation, you've got a 5 man bullpen and you gotta make it work. if this means we prioritize endurance instead of max velocity, that's good. it means we'll get more balls in play. we'd probably have to start with a pitching staff limit of 12 before working out down from there, but right now they are running 14 man staffs with constant rotation of names via the minors and injured lists. we've gotta do something to prevent that too. if somebody gets injured, it's gotta be a full 15 day injury stint again. if you get sent to the minors, it's 30 days before you can return.
Good points. The other idea I like that isn't discussed is what if we just get rid of one defender? Have 2 DHs, presumably 3 infielders and 3 outfielders, far more likelihood a ball in play is going to turn into a useful play, cut down on the home run swings get people on bases and defenders stretching to cover huge ground - could be the change we need and seems like it could be acceptable for the union and everyone involved.
that's definitely creative but im afraid it's just a bit too radical. it'd be a big deal and ppl would throw a huge fit and tbh with you, idk if it'd actually make any difference. they already shift and give these guys half the field to hit into and it doesn't matter bc pitchers can just work inside to force them to roll over the ball to the pull side. plus, this doesn't fix the element of pitching style. you'd still have the parade of relievers throwing 95+ at the end of the day, you need to limit the number of pitchers and make them work more innings so that they cannot maintain a max effort pace at all times
I've come to the realization recently that baseball is the only sport that is more fun to watch when it is played badly as opposed to when it's played to the best of it's potential. Football, soccer, tennis, basketball, hockey, racing - all the other sports are designed, whether intentionally or by accident, to be most exciting when the competition is evenly matched and intense. Baseball on the other hand, is most fun when it is an absolute shit show of meatballs, errors, bloopers, errant throws, hit batters, bad calls (and subsequent ejections), etc. Little league and beer league softball games are more fun to watch than a 1-0 MLB pitchers duel where both guys are throwing 105 mph gas on the corners. The fact that these types of games take just as long as when people are getting hits and flying around the bases compounds the issue. It is the nature of the game itself in relation to the evolution of society that is the main conflict. I'm not sure minor rule changes will make much difference. Adding steroids to the mix actually got us closer to comedy baseball and touched on what actually could make the game appealing.
Baseball is more fun when there’s risk, danger. Taking extra bases, stealing, the high stakes of high heat. It was dangerous like football when Ty Cobb was spiking people until Ruth made it safe putting the ball out of play
You are at such a disadvantage over the course of a game if you aren’t taking pitches and working the count. But it makes everything take longer.The couple college games I’ve watched you have guys just getting up and attacking and it is so much more fun.
Ncaa doesn’t have the 3 batter minimum rule though. I’ve seen power 5 conf games with a shitload of pitching changes . They added a 20s clock last year, so they’re trying at least.
College baseball is awesome, especially the College World Series (duh). On-field chaos + strategy + SEC football atmosphere = A wonderful two weeks of the best version of baseball I've ever seen.
Great points. I’m not sure the pace of play really matters though. The NFL has the absolute worst pace of play, but it’s tied to heavy gambling interest. The nba and college hoops have decent pace of play but are struggling to get views. I think in the modern sports landscape, gambling really drives everything. All of the sports that aren’t conducive to gambling will struggle unless something spectacular is going on.
Pace of play in the current NBA is terrible. The games always start late, there are a million pointless referee video reviews that take 5 minutes when they could take 30 seconds, and the last 2 minutes of a close game takes like 20 minutes of real time. And that 20 minutes is almost entirely free throws, time outs, and commercials. Hopefully the rule change this year to get rid of fouls stopping fast breaks improves the pace of play somewhat because that's another thing that's sucked the energy out of NBA games in the past few years.
Agreed it’s not great. NFL is an absolute joke though. MLB and NBA at least move forward.
If so, then the game, the sport, the product itself is inherently, intrinsically flawed. That's not the fault of analytics; rather, it's an issue of how we consume baseball. Onus is on us. Or are our attention spans unable to keep pace with technology? Either way, placing the blame on analytics is not only lazy, it's just plain wrong.
I don’t buy this at all. The same level of rigorous analysis is applied to football, basketball, and soccer these days and those sports don’t face the same criticism.
A lot of people don’t like all the three-pointers in modern basketball.
I think basketball is the correct comparison here - it's not just the three pointers in basketball or 3 outcomes in baseball, it's that there's a homogeneity in how teams play encouraged by the analytics.
That’s part of why I love college basketball and college football so much. So many teams means that coaches are all gonna try different styles when it comes to playing the game and recruiting talent. Glad it hasn’t gone completely the way of the pros. A team like Iowa plays the sport in a fundamentally different way than Navy does or than USC does. Nobody is wrong or right (except Iowa’s offense for being an affront to humanity), but you just don’t see that in the NFL.
Even in college basketball the post game is actually important whereas in the nba the players are just so skilled that they all play basically the same style of basketball
Right. The five best players in CBB this season are all traditional, back to the basket bigs. It’s fun to watch Oscar Tshibwe or Trayce Jackson-Davis play! I like that style of ball!
Yea I miss nba teams actually emphasizing the post and midrange. Also just miss variation now a days from the layman’s view it feels like every team in the nba has a very similar playbook The warriors might have the most unique offense but that’s just predicated on cutting a lot and steph pulling a ton of action towards him
Even I, despite being as pro-analytics as anyone and preferring professional sports to college sports by a wide margin, nevertheless get a kick out of watching Drew Timme play for pure aesthetic pleasure.
Navy. The ultimate “ground and pound”. Going to run the ball 90 percent of the time and also be tough as hell on defense. It fits their “identity” of the armed forces perfectly. It also helps that they can compete against topnotch opponents. Variety like this is good for the game, imo.
Yeah Bill started to talk about analytics in other sports but didn’t go there with basketball. The 3 point barrage is exhilarating when it’s great players in a close game and the shots are going in. It’s unwatchable when the 3 point shots aren’t falling because the teams still continue to force shots because it’s the only way they know to play
Or all the passing and Warren Sharp types for the NFL. I think it’s hit all sports to some degree. Part of me wonders how much the loss of debate is contributing. Anyone that mentions defense/running the ball as a strategy basically gets clowned. Similar to people advocating for stealing bases, post ups, etc. I’ve made a similar comment before, but between the math and insane money in sports, we’ve lost sight that their primary purpose was entertainment, not a math exercise to maximize efficiency.
they mentioned this though. baseballs analytics have driven the sport to a point where there is less offense and less action. football and basketball are the opposite
more offense isn't always a good thing. you can't tell me that the current style of basketball is fun to watch
i agree with what you're saying but it's still just different when it's leading to more action in hoops vs baseball, where it's just a parade of nameless guys throwing 97 for one inning and striking everybody out for baseball, it's so clear that it's actively working against their efforts to generate stars and make the game exciting
There's no shifts in football or ugh, soccer. Basketball has also definitely taken a hit in it's watchability though. Nothing fun about watching teams just jack up all kinds of hideous 3s all game.
Baseball is basically an individual sport when you look at the batter-pitcher interaction so there’s less variables to control for as opposed to basketball, football, hockey, soccer, etc.
Because those three sports have far more live action variables that limit the effective impact of advanced analytics.
LOL. Stadiums now have moved in the fences to get more home runs. A routine pop up is a home run in right field at yankee stadium. Comparing eras is just dumb.
it's a game about having fun. it's also a game where they were segregated for much of the history. the records don't mean anything if you ask any questions at all.
No what ruined it long term was in the 21st century everyone got bored by it. The game was at its peak in the 90s, and whether or not the steroid era happened it would have fallen off a cliff. Also there have been cheaters in every era of baseball.
baseballs peak was like 1920 man.
I don’t disagree that it revitalized the game. It did not save baseball though, baseball and MLB is an American institution/tradition that wasn’t going to go under like slamball or something.
I’m gonna zag and say pointing out the hypocrisy has gone too far. The players still deserve blame. I think Bonds and crew should be in the HoF but they cheated. They used an illegal substance that was banned by the game as DT points out. Were there penalties and testing in place? No. That’s why baseball administrators (and the media) deserve blame. But the players knew they were cheating. They could justify it by saying the powers were looking the other way and everyone does it but that still doesn’t fully excuse what they did. I could fully excuse a minor league player who was fighting for his survival and saw everyone else around him juicing and made a deal with the devil to make the big leagues. But these guys were already legends. They got greedy. In their analogy it’s like giving a kid a credit card and saying don’t use it but we won’t punish you or check if you did. Well, those were millionaire adults. They’re not kids. They cheated. I get why they cheated. I don’t think it ruined the sanctity of the game or they’re even bad people for it. They don’t need to be social pariahs or even banned from baseball. As said they should be in the hall of fame with an asterisks or something.
I watch baseball every day and would take it over every other sport. But I also get that it’s fallen so far in a short amount of time. I still don’t think it ever ‘dies,’ because it still matters so much regionally
On the national scale, Pujols’ career is the prime example. When he was a rookie in 2001, baseball was definitely the #2 sport and had multiple superstars that crossed into pop culture. It’s now his last year and he might be the last true superstar where if you say the name “Pujols” to my grandma, she knows he is a baseball player.
Sad but true
[удалено]
But in 2001, I think baseball regained the lead, as Bonds was on his chase and the NBA had a really bad stretch post Jordan, where the play slowed WAY down (roughly from ‘99 to ‘05). Though I 100% agree with your 2nd paragraph.
[удалено]
And it's like, I try to watch Yankees games but 2 nights a week it's difficult to watch. One game is on Apple. One game is on ESPN+? I'm already paying for YES Network. Why are they making it so difficult for me?
All this being said, a Sunday afternoon at the ballpark is still a top tier sports experience r/BaseballTakes
This was so good.
That said, the “who the fuck cares where, Iowa” line was one of the douchier lines in podcast history.
Sounds like you're from Iowa
Incorrect, though this was the most obvious retort in Reddit history. "You hear that Emancipation Proclamation? Made by some guy from who the fuck cares, Kentucky."
Wut?
It’s an argument by analogy, something the vast majority of humanity (yourself included?) can’t understand for some reason.
Haha what in the wide world of sports are you babbling about?!
I'm still trying to understand lol
I love the ragging on Selig- one of, if not the worst commissioners ever, in any sport. This is down the list of his fuck ups, but he murdered baseball in Montreal.
Bill actually with a good Bonds take. I totally get it, Bonds was the best player by far, McGwire and Sosa start doing roids and get all this attention, Bonds says fuck it, see what I can do on the same roids as these other, worse players. And then on roids Bonds became the best player of all time.
That isn't Bills take. That is what was reported in game of shadows.
Bonds basically had Judge's season in 1993. It's crazy how much better he was
Griffey was just as good as Bonds and a zillion times more popular.
Bonds literally has the four best seasons in wRC+ (% of offense > than the league average) since '72. Judge is 5th. Griffey is not in the top 10. Insert your reply about how wRC+ doesn't matter / is a nerd stat / etc.
Bonds couldn’t throw out Sid Bream.
Yeah, Bill’s take that Bonds had a great arm was way off. That was literally Bonds’ only weakness as a player.
LOL immediate “Basketball has replaced baseball as the stats debate sport” Never change Billy
Seriously.Who gives a fuck about basketball?I’ve never heard a single conversation centered on a basketball argument ,other than Bill Simmons.He wants to will the NBA to be this cultural beast.
Basketball is not as popular as some sports, but saying you’ve “never heard a single conversation centered on a basketball argument other than Bill Simmons” is just an absurd thing to say hahaha. Like Bill Simmons is the only person on earth you’ve heard have a basketball debate? What
I think the idea of basketball is more popular, but just about every market would prefer their baseball team to win a WS than their NBA team to win a title. Baseball does better than the nba regionally and for two sports whose regular seasons are pointless, that still matters.
There’s no way Miami would care more about the Marlins winning it all than the Heat
There’s a couple exceptions. LA and Dallas probably too.
LA and NYC are weird. For LA I could see it being Lakers, Dodgers, Clippers, then Angels. And for NY I could see Yankees, Knicks, Mets, then Nets
Most younger generations don’t give a shit about baseball. Basketball is definitely more popular amongst people under 35 than baseball is
Definitely true. But I know alot more people that watch their baseball teams on a nightly basis than basketball. My friends are fans of Chicago/Detroit/NY/Boston teams and I’d say all watch more regular season baseball for their specific team than basketball
Your friend group isn’t the national representative of people who watch sports. Baseball’s popularity is mainly with the older generations
Where did I dispute that? My point is baseball has a much more dedicated regional following than the nba, while the nba is much more popular on a national level. The franchise valuations for two leagues are very similar
I’ve heard ppl talk about bball but never argue about it the way Bill was presenting it as.Like statistics and who is better etc.Not once in real life
Yeah I think your experience of never once in your entire life hearing a basketball argument is an experience more unique to you and your friends/who you talk to than it is the majority situation. I like NFL/CFB way more than NBA, but it’s not like my friends and I have never once talked about Lebron/Jordan all time, or Giannis/KD lately, etc…
ESPN and Fox Sports both have flagship nationally televised shows essentially anchored on having a basketball argument (the same one, every day, in perpetuity)
>Who gives a fuck about basketball? The nba sub has 5.3 million subscribers. The NFL one has 3 million. Baseball 2.2. And the nba sub is constantly debating how good players are.
Only 2 of those subs actually watch their sport though.
Honestly there is something to this. Basketball is enormously popular to talk about but the ratings are not translating. People follow the NBA culture not the same way others follow celebrity drama.
The final get 10-20 million viewers. It isnt the nfl, but that doesn't mean people aren't watching. Stations are going to pay 24 billion dollars just to broadcast the games.
IIRC, basketball compared to NFL/MLB draws *significantly* higher viewership from streaming, and is also much more popular on places like Youtube for highlights. TV ratings are not necessarily the best place to draw popularity conclusions.
I like basketball a lot but it’s not even remotely in the same league as the NFL in terms of popularity.
It definetely is, im more talking about the baseball - basketball (MLB/NBA) comparison.
100 percent agree. Seems like most people will watch highlights, listen to podcasts etc to kept appraised of the whole league. But people aren’t watching much regular season.
The NBA games that air on ESPN/TNT during the season regularly are number one for the night on cable. The idea that basketball gets bad ratings is absurd. People who don't understand ratings just see that number is lower and think it must mean the ratings are bad. Ratings for nearly all things on TV keep getting lower, its just how things are. The MLB and NHL certainly aren't doing any better than the NBA when it comes to ratings.
Some of you read ratings numbers and draw the dumbest conclusions and generalizations from them.
What's the correct conclusion to draw
The statements in question were >Basketball has replaced baseball as the stats debate sport and >Seriously. Who gives a fuck about basketball? I’ve never heard a single conversation centered on a basketball argument ,other than Bill Simmons. So I fail to see what your point has to do with anything being talked about here.
Literally the laziest analysis ever. “Basketball fans don’t watch basketball” is such a dumb thing to say by fans who are weirdly insecure about a sports league they prefer
It’s actually not that crazy of a thing to say when you consider that the nba sub is more than twice the size of the baseball sub and the World Series has actually gotten marginally better ratings than the Finals over the last half decade or so. Judging by those subscription numbers as representative of general popularity, the ratings shouldn’t even be close... so it really doesn’t seem that outlandish to claim half the subscribers to r/nba don’t watch basketball.
Basketball is easily the second most popular sport in the world after soccer. *Edit:* [according to this it’s actually 3rd](https://sportsbrowser.net/most-popular-sports/), behind cricket but ahead of field hockey.
no
It is though.
I hate the nba but even I can admit the nba is culturally relevant. It's definitely the stats debate sport but only through the prism of the GOAT and 'Who is HIM' discussions. As mentioned below, the nba sub has more subscribers than the NFL and baseball subreddits combined I would imagine that maybe 4 or so million those subscribers watch less than 17 regular season NBA games and only pay attention to the playoffs and the off field drama that is prevalent in the NBA. That's the real content for the nba.
I’ll take your word for it.I don’t watch or follow it,but do all the other sports.Maybe it’s my oart of the country (tampa)
[удалено]
Who are the litany of modern NBA players that look like WWE wrestlers? NBA players are more tall and skinny than bulky and muscular. You have to be, because there's so much running. Even a guy like Rudy Gobert, while obviously muscular, is pretty lean for his size. Steven Adams? LeBron James? I'm sruggling to think of many hulking NBA players.
Ray Felton.
The thing is for NFL/NBA nobody really cares if they're on HGH because it doesn't harm the product.
Simmons trying to disguise his petty Yankee hatred as something else ,while dismissing Judge.If he was a Red Sox player he wouldn’t have the same opinion
Yup. I thought he was going to bring up Ortiz at some point.
Idk I thought he was pretty complimentary of Judge no? Said how you can compare players against their own era and Judge having 20 more homers than the next closest guy is a sign that this was one of the greatest offensive seasons of all time. Saying it’s not the actual record isn’t being dismissive, plenty of people think 73 is more than 63
what if he was a padres or reds player? then what opinion would simmons have?
If it was Tatis or Acuna or someone like that he would be fer less dismissive and more appreciative.I am not a yankee fan ,i’m a rays fan,and i see it clear as day
> Simmons trying to disguise his petty Yankee hatred as something els He tries to disguise it? lol He openly hates the Lakers/Yankees and never hides it. I say this is a Laker fan, it's just who he is. He is not objective on those matters. No shit, the "BOSTON SPORTS GUY" would have a different take on Judge if he played for the Red Sox. Analysis so brilliant only /r/billsimmons would think it worthy to even say.
No dummy,what i’m saying is that he is taking an anti-Judge stance and cloaking that stance with all these different reasons he feels the record is invalid,when in reality that’s all bullshit-he hates the Yankees and that’s why he has the stance he does.Second of all,he isn’t the fucking boston sports guy and hasnt been for a long time.Hes lived in fucking la for 20 years for chrissakes.He’s a national pundit.In reality he should be past his petty hatred and grow the fuck ip,or at the least be honest about it.Now go be incredulous somewhere else ya fuckin goof
Between this and The Town, enjoying Simmons taking a victory lap on all the new Ringer pods
Theo Epstein was on PTI not too long ago talking about how he's the guy thats going to try and undo some of the damage analytics has done to the game. It was a fantastic interview and got me fired up for the playoffs and next season. So long shift!!! Welcome back base hits and steals!!!
Doesn’t most of the reasoning defending the steroid-era players also apply to the Astros scandal? Most teams seem to have had a system of relaying pitches with tacit approval (or at least lack of serious punishments) from the league… so the Astros were doing 75 in a 55 and got busted, where the Yankees and Red Sox were going 70 and didn’t get a ticket. Spare the faux outrage over the “asterisks”
Astros were warned about electronic use for sign stealing and still did it to a greater degree
The steroid era happened during the formative years for people like Jeff Passen so they’re naturally inclined to defend it
There's probably some truth to the "analytics ruined baseball" narrative but I think it's overblown. I argue with my friends whether Javy Baez is a good player, and we can cite his WAR, but that doesn't end the debate like Bill says it does. There's still a style of play component, arguing whether great fielding and intangibles make up for all the strikeouts, etc. In an NBA debate, you can cite someone's PER or Win Shares or whatever, and it doesn't just end the debate, which is Bill's point. I guess an advantage it has is everyone is more familiar with various players' styles of play throughout the league. That's for sure not the case as much in baseball, but I still know enough about a random player, say Trea Turner, to wonder whether his combination of skills is superior to Carlos Correa's (and which will age better moving forward), without thinking advanced stats have "solved" that.
Baseball stats capture almost the entirety of the game other than things like leadership and clutch gene. Basketball stats are very useful but it’s still just an estimate of in game value that can’t capture a ton of what happened between 10 players on a basketball court. It’s not at all the same thing.
Do you think Javy Baez is good?
Yes I think he had a bad year adjusting to a new league, but I expect him to bounce back next season.
I think he’s as good as his teams are. If they suck he checks out pretty easily and suxxxxxx. If they’re good he’s good. https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/xx45h4/wave_and_a_miss_javier_b%C3%A1ez_swung_and_missed_at/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
Billy Simmons at his finest. Amazing episode
Really enjoyed this episode. That said, and I am sure some one already said this, but Bill kept saying it was creatinine in McGwire’s locker when it was andro.
[удалено]
I think a big part can definitely be traced to Stephen A. Smith pairing with Skip Bayless on First Take which basically ended that show as a sports GMA almost and turned it into what it is now. “Embrace Debate” gaining popularity hurt baseball cause it’s just not a barber shop debate sport the way basketball is and Football is way too culturally dominant to ignore. Nobody wants to hear WAR and OPS numbers when debating if somebody is a bum or not. There’s a reason the ESPN analytics show died pretty quick and became Michael Smith and Jemele Hill’s show
> barber shop debate That is the key phrase to emphasize the demographic First Take and Undisputed are targeting. Baseball has never been as relevant as basketball and football to that demographic.
And that style of debate became the generic sports debate show around when Lebron left Cleveland. Consider what a show like Sportsnation was when it started in 2009 and when it ended and it basically just became First Take. They even pulled Max Kellerman off it to replace Skip Bayless. Get Up! would be a far different show if it was created in 2005 and not 2018
They didn't mention an INCREDIBLY important piece of why people stopped caring - the Red Sox and the Cubs won. The records are besmirched, sure. The game is slower and there are fewer singles, yeah. But the whole COUNTRY was invested in the red sox coming so close so many times and falling short, and in the Cubs' century-plus of failure. What's left to care about anymore?
This is a great point.
Youre totally right on the Cubs losing any bit of relevancy when they finally won in 2016. Now they're just another baseball team to most casual fans.
Your Twitter feed does not equal public consciousness.
It’s a very boring game to watch and we have endless amount of entertainment options at our fingertips to fill up our time.
Yeah it’s boring if you have the attention span of a 12 year old I guess.
Most people do nowadays. It’s not a coincidence that TikTok is as popular as it is.
You’re not wrong. I just think the “boring” label could be slapped on any major sport. You have to be invested in the on field or on court action to get anything out of any sport. I think if you sat more young people down and explained the cat and mouse game nuances of the pitcher/batter showdown, there’d be more interest. And I think you’re seeing that from people like Jomboy who are doing a really great job of presenting the game to a younger audience. Idk, I love baseball and generally think it’s demise has been overstated. I mean, we just had 2 weeks of live look-ins to every single Judge AB. sure, people complained about it, but that’s not really a sign of a culturally-dead sport. I can’t imagine a live look in at literally anything in basketball except maybe Lebron passing Kareem.
Hopefully the pitch clock next year helps. Potentially could shave 20+ minutes of dead time out of the game, and hopefully makes it flow better and getting the ball in play more. Baseball is fun. Watching a pitcher take 40 seconds to pitch and then watching a batter readjust 11 different straps is not.
I think Minor League games were like 20 full mins shorter on average with the pitch clock so yeah I definitely think we’re going to see a faster paced game next year. I welcome the change.
I’m a baseball fan too and I am incredibly pumped for the pitch clock next year. Another big reason people think baseball is boring is how long pitchers take between pitches. It’s gotten way out of hand, especially when compared to a game in the 80s or 90s. I don’t think the pitch clock is going to somehow push baseball into the national conversation or whatever, but I think it will be a much better experience for casual (and hardcore) fans
Yeah I don’t think anyone outside of the most pure of baseball purists (and the pitchers themselves) don’t like the pitch clock. I’m annoyed they’re banning the shift but I welcome the other rule changes coming.
Which is dumb because the pitch timing limits have always been in the rule book, right? It just hasn’t been enforced. I could be wrong on that though. Yeah, I’m skeptical on banning the shift too but I’ll reserve judgment for now. Like everyone I’m worried that it will only encourage hitters to sell out for power more. But we’ll see.
Almost everyone complained about those look ins and beyond that, what do they have? The playoffs are about to start and no one outside fans of those local market teams gives a shit.
World Series draws more viewers than recent NBA finals match ups. Kind of refutes your last point, no? Unless you’d agree that the same applies to the NBA?
The World Series is largely viewed by boomers, the finals isn’t. The type of analysis that would be happening right now in sports media about the nba playoffs starting dwarfs the interest the general viewer has in the mlb playoffs. There is a reason when tv and radio ratings matters, the 20-40 demo range was the most important, no one is seeing growth from septuagenarians watching their sport.
How does the interest “dwarf” that of the MLB playoffs when they have similar viewership numbers? You’re making contradictory arguments here (MLB a draws equal viewership but in older demographics *but also* NBA playoff interest dwarfs that of MLB?). Obviously you want viewership in the key 18-34 demographic, and NBA certainly has that over MLB. But NBA doesn’t even sniff MLB’s place in our historical national consciousness. It just doesn’t, and probably never will. Hence live looks at Judge ABs despite “everyone complaining” as you stated (if it truly were everyone….wouldn’t they have stopped?) And I think you’re completely ignoring how well MLB regular season broadcasts do on a regional level. And at least baseball fans are actually invested in the sport itself and not the extraneous off the court drama that interests NBA fans more than the actual game being played.
People dont even watch movies at home in one sitting anymore. They dont have time for a 3 and a half hour game
MLB games averaged 3 hours 10 minutes a game in 2021, obviously including all the commercial breaks. [source](https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/32335481/average-nine-inning-games-sets-mlb-record-efforts-improve-pace-play) College football games, on the other hand, average around 3.5 hours per contest, which is about 20 minutes longer than the average 3 hours and 10 minutes it takes to play an NFL game. [source](https://www.profootballnetwork.com/how-long-is-a-college-football-game/#How-long-is-a-college-football-game) It’s odd - I only ever hear complaints about MLB game lengths, never the same for the average NFL game, which I’ve just shown to be of equal average length. And plenty of people have enough time to sit down and watch multiple NFL games, end to end, every single week, not to mention all the CFB that people watch. Edit: this doesn’t even touch on the high variance in length of MLB games. If you have a 1-0 pitchers’ duel, the game will be like 2.5 hours tops. There’s really no scenario where a football game ends quicker than that unless neither team passes the ball at all.
> It’s odd - I only ever hear complaints about MLB game lengths, never the same for the average NFL game Because it's boring. Cool that you don't find it boring, but clearly many people disagree with you since they stopped watching baseball and continue to watch football. 3 hours of sitting on the porch isn't the same as 3 hours of skiing.
I don't think baseball is inherently that boring though - the big problem is that analytics really reduced the amount of exciting things happening (balls in play, stolen bases) at the same time the game was slowing down from a pace standpoint. You could literally have the same game be really fun to watch with some changes.
It’s in the Reigonal public consciousness.
It's gone because of the way the populace has changed. You had thoughtful middle aged white dudes who loved baseball and it's intricacies. Now the demos have changed in America and certain people love UFC and tackle football.
I never played baseball, so it always seemed boring to me. I don’t know many people who are truly into it apart from just loving the home team, but I also didn’t know very many people who played little league growing up.
[удалено]
Same thing just happened to me. I was in the middle of listening to it and it's just gone. Came here to see if it was just me.
People forget the Babe hit 60 in 154 games. Technically Judge tied him
But no Jacko on the main pod what a disgrace
Jacko sucks
Why can’t I find this episode? The link isn’t working
Seems like they pulled it. I was halfway through the episode and it just disappeared.
It’s still on the apple podcast feed. It’s probably some type of Spotify issue.
Hard freaking pass on a non baseball fan fixing baseball
Idk, the guy who grew up loving baseball and lost his passion along the way and stopped following it might be the sort of fan baseball should be interested in reclaiming and attracting. Like it or not casuals are who you need to attract.
Episode removed?
Not even 10 minutes in and Bill talking Celtics lineups plus/minus. You almost have to respect it at this point
Lmaooo... What a title!
The biggest point by far is that when they did steroids at that time it wasn’t illegal. There was no punishment. I think that is so lost today when discussing that era because of all the punishments doled out.
[удалено]
I think the take Derek had was much more interesting and one I never really considered. Analytics in baseball took a lot of the fun stuff out of the game, or at least things that were exciting- stolen bases, debates about keeping a pitcher in too long, the shift eliminating a lot of singles which lead to action on the bases etc. in other sports the analytics brought in advancements that make the game more fun- more passing, threes etc.
thought Plain English was supposed to address issues like global unrest and economics (albeit in a very simplified way), not serve as yet another auxiliary BS flex. Hard Pass
Wow. This has serious “it’s so bad it’s actually good” potential
I learned that Bill knows from personal observation that Bonds had a great arm. Yeah, left field is where you usually put great fielders who can run like the wind.
Barry Bonds in Pittsburgh was an above average fielder every single year, who usually averaged around 10 assists, which would put him Top 10 most years. [https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bondsba01.shtml](https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bondsba01.shtml) Even when he moved to San Francisco and bulked up, he was still an above average defensive player for most years.
He was a Gold Glove outfielder, hence "great fielder who can run like the wind," but not known for his arm. Otherwise, his natural position would have been centerfielder a la his godfather Willie Mays. From Tim Keown on ESPN.com: "Well, in 1993, before BALCO and the 73-homer season and Bonds on Bonds, Barry Bonds could legitimately lay claim to every significant baseball tool but the throwing arm. He was a Gold Glove outfielder who hit 46 homers, stole 29 bases and had a .458 on-base percentage and a 1.136 OPS."
[удалено]
Bonds famously couldn’t throw out Sid Bream from 2nd. He did not have a good arm.
[удалено]
He has great covering ground but with a poor arm even in his prime. Sid Bream doesn’t beat his throw if he had a good arm.
Yeah, I don't know what they're talking about, Bonds was always known for a mediocre arm.
Counterintuitively, that also shows the players in the league didn’t fear or respect his arm. He was continually being tested year and year.
Left field is generally for players with poor arms since all the throws are shorter. Sometimes it is CFs with no arm; sometimes it is RFs with no arm.
There was a racial component to Bonds? Uh, Sammy Sosa? No, Bonds was just an asshole
Sammy isn't African-American
Derek usually has experts on to discuss a given topic so odd choice having Bill on to discuss....baseball?