Why the f**k is baseball so boring?

Dial it up wrote:

You may have an easier time with things if you read what I'm telling you and not what you want to read. I didn't say the Dodgers or Cubs were examples of "doing it right." I used them as examples of teams with huge payrolls like the Yankees, but who are currently far more relevant than the Yankees. Obviously the Cubs have high priced acquisitions, that's why I brought them up.

LOL at you actually thinking the Yankees were a contender this year. Get real.

Here is what you said:

Dial it up wrote:

1) Yankees are 1-3 in payroll every year, almost never in contention. The dodgers and Cubs have high payrolls, and they are/we're competing for a championship.

I pointed out that the Yankees are almost ALWAYS in contention, specifically far more often than the Cub or the Dodgers (the teams you chose as teams that are competitive).

You can spin all you want, there's what you said.

The Yankees were just 2 games out of the Wild Card with a couple weeks to play. Were they going to win the WS? Almost certainly not. But they were in contention for sure. Ironically, after shipping out their two best pitchers and best hitter and (not ironically) getting A-Rod out of town and going to the young guys.

Yes that is what I said. No spinning. The other two teams currently spending TONS of money have/had real shots at the World Series. The yanks didn't.

Dial it up wrote:

Yes that is what I said. No spinning. The other two teams currently spending TONS of money have/had real shots at the World Series. The yanks didn't.

For one year. Great sample size. Add statistics to baseball among things you don't get I guess.

Wendell Gee wrote:

Dial it up wrote:

Yes that is what I said. No spinning. The other two teams currently spending TONS of money have/had real shots at the World Series. The yanks didn't.

For one year. Great sample size. Add statistics to baseball among things you don't get I guess.

Oh please let's compare our educational backgrounds and see who comes out on top.

I'm not conducting ground breaking research. I'm stating a fact: for the amount of money the Yankees spend, they underachieve regularly. Has nothing to do with the Dodgers underachieving.

Well, baseball fans are more boring than baseball.

Dial it up wrote:

Has nothing to do with the Dodgers underachieving.

Great point, why did you bring the Dodgers up then?

Stick with the basic point and you'd have been right. The Yankees underachieve relative to their spending.

I think it is hard for people that never played baseball to realize how hard it is. If you can just get 3 hits in every 10 at bats you will be an all-star. If you only completed 30% of your passes as QB or 30% of your shots in BB, you would get benched.

I find baseball exciting but it isn't for everyone. To me soccer is very boring.

Baseball is only dull to a dull mind

doot doot wrote:

Star wrote:

As opposed to watching a marathon.

If you've ever been able to run even a single mile at elite marathon pace you'd find it exciting. Watching elite races gives me a huge adrenaline rush.

Hopefully baseball dies with the Boomers.

No they are both terribly boring.

I know I wrote how a baseball game can be interesting when you follow it and get into the ebb and flow but last night's game was pretty boring.

Once they got up to 5-0 after 5 innings I was just waiting for the final 24 outs.

And they really took their time finishing it out.

I think their were 6 or 7 mid-inning pitching changes in a game that was never close.

Star wrote:

I know I wrote how a baseball game can be interesting when you follow it and get into the ebb and flow but last night's game was pretty boring.

Once they got up to 5-0 after 5 innings I was just waiting for the final 24 outs.

And they really took their time finishing it out.

I think their were 6 or 7 mid-inning pitching changes in a game that was never close.

Well the Indian's are out their 2nd best pitcher in Carrasco. Bauer is coming off of that stupid pinky injury and is very spotty in his strikes to balls. They were just trying to stop the bleeding.

Shaw is a bum. Trade that guy asap.

Star wrote:

I know I wrote how a baseball game can be interesting when you follow it and get into the ebb and flow but last night's game was pretty boring.

Once they got up to 5-0 after 5 innings I was just waiting for the final 24 outs.

And they really took their time finishing it out.

I think their were 6 or 7 mid-inning pitching changes in a game that was never close.

There is no question that the way baseball is played now is less exciting than it used to be. Nothing could possibly be worse than a Red Sox Yankees playoff showdown. There is no reason that 9 inning games should take 4 hours.

Star wrote:

I know I wrote how a baseball game can be interesting when you follow it and get into the ebb and flow but last night's game was pretty boring.

Once they got up to 5-0 after 5 innings I was just waiting for the final 24 outs.

And they really took their time finishing it out.

I think their were 6 or 7 mid-inning pitching changes in a game that was never close.

The other thing you have to understand is that Tito does not want to stretch anyone thin. The pitching rotation was to ensure that these guys got out there and get a few throws in without dragging one person through the mud for too long.

Their pitching is their biggest weakness right now aside from the fact that they are batting like .185.

Star wrote:

I know I wrote how a baseball game can be interesting when you follow it and get into the ebb and flow but last night's game was pretty boring.

Once they got up to 5-0 after 5 innings I was just waiting for the final 24 outs.

And they really took their time finishing it out.

I think their were 6 or 7 mid-inning pitching changes in a game that was never close.

Duration of first two 2016 WS Games -

3:37

4:04

Duration all seven 1967 WS Games -

2:22

2:24

2:15

2:05

2:20

2:48

2:23

Discus.

Wendell Gee wrote:

In fact, the Yankees payroll is closer to the Cubs than it is to the Dodgers.

Um... no. Not even close. Here are 2016 Opening Day Team Payrolls —

Dodgers

$ 223,352,402

Yankees

$ 213,472,857

Cubs

$ 116,654,522

Fun With Facts wrote:

Um... no. Not even close. Here are 2016 Opening Day Team Payrolls —

Dodgers

$ 223,352,402

Yankees

$ 213,472,857

Cubs

$ 116,654,522

Opening day payrolls don't tell the whole story, you should know that.

Here is a much more accurate source:

LAD $279M

NYY $227M

CHC $187M

Wendell Gee wrote:

Fun With Facts wrote:

Um... no. Not even close. Here are 2016 Opening Day Team Payrolls —

Dodgers

$ 223,352,402

Yankees

$ 213,472,857

Cubs

$ 116,654,522

Opening day payrolls don't tell the whole story, you should know that.

Here is a much more accurate source:

http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/

LAD $279M

NYY $227M

CHC $187M

Natch. And which of those 3 teams failed to make the payoffs?

Fun With Facts wrote:

Wendell Gee wrote:

Opening day payrolls don't tell the whole story, you should know that.

Here is a much more accurate source:

http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/payroll/

LAD $279M

NYY $227M

CHC $187M

Natch. And which of those 3 teams failed to make the payoffs?

I'm not here to defend the Yankees. I'm just pointing out where blatantly incorrect things have been stated.

Arguing that one team is doing better with their money gets reduced to one team "doing it right." In this case, the Indians are doing it much better.