Fresh off taking in the Chicago Bears’ 4th-straight win, I find myself in a rare mood on a Sunday evening. It’s not often I get this feeling, and to be pleased 4 Sundays in a row? Am I dreaming?
Without the Mets to spoil these vibes, I decided to sit down and write about a few thoughts I’ve had this week. Hopefully, if I remain disciplined enough, I can turn this into a weekly thing, meaning I’ll just spew some random ideas or questions that crossed my mind throughout the week.
I’ve marketed myself as a baseball-only blog, focusing on sabermetrics, evaluations of baseball players and teams, and league-wide changes. I’ll allow these sandboxes to give me the free range of touching other sports and industries. As I search for the next step of my career (ideally in the sports realm), it will be important I display some level of ubiquity in this industry.
With that being said, I hope you all enjoy reading about my thoughts, fantasies, questions, opinions, observations, whatever I may write down here.
Will the World Series be anticlimactic?
Ah, Rob Manfred’s nightmare…
Well, almost. At least he’s getting Shohei Ohtani in the sport’s biggest stage, fresh off perhaps the greatest single game in baseball history… ever… literally.
I’m sure the prospect of Milwaukee versus one of Toronto or Seattle wasn’t a negative thing in the eyes of the hardcore baseball fan. Milwaukee, up until this NLCS, was one of the most fun teams I’ve personally watched in years. They were certainly frustrating to play against for the Mets. However, two small-market teams matching up in the Fall Classic wouldn’t put the MLB on the map quite like it would if it were the Dodgers playing a team like the Yankees again.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the prospects of this World Series still. The big bad Dodgers with their $350 million payroll beating up on a team with a payroll a third of that size and then getting to play a team with a significantly lower number once again in the World Series creates a clear underdog story and it’s likely that everyone outside of LA and Japan will be rooting for the AL side of the fight.
But will the matchup lead to a lack of climax on the season? I hope not. And I’m curious to hear others’ opinions on this.
Just looking at the Dodgers’ numbers at a very high level… in the regular season they hit the second-most home runs (244), scored the second-most runs (791), the third-highest OPS (114), the second-highest wOBA (.331), and the second-best wRC+ (113). The offense was never the question with them. It was the pitching…
…and it’s delivered like NO ONE expected.
Dodgers’ pitching during the regular season held a 106 ERA+ and a 92 FIP-. However, their relievers held an ERA (4.27) better than just 9 teams. Naturally, the bullpen was a concern heading into the playoffs. So the Dodgers’ plan? Don’t use ’em!
In 10 games, their starting pitchers have gone 64.1 IP, so averaging going past the 6th inning, significantly reducing the load on the bullpen. They’ve also moved Roki Sasaki to a closer role as well as traditional-starter Emmet Sheehan to a relief role. But the length has given them so much flexibility and confidence. It can be inferred that since the starters went long into games, they’ve been pitching well. How ’bout a 1.40 ERA and 2.00 FIP? Would ya take that?
The point I’m trying to get across by praising the Dodgers is that we’re gonna get some good baseball. I won’t get into the numbers of Toronto or Seattle in this (because that would make this entirely too long and that’s not the point), but those are both really good baseball teams as well. Sure, they’re spending less money, but they’ve got good pitching and hitting AND they have character: in Toronto, you have Vladdy, Mad Max Scherzer, Springer, Kirkie, and in Seattle: Naylor, Geno, Señor Smoke aka Andres Muñoz. I could go on and on. So, even for the non-diehards I think this will be an entertaining series worth tuning in for, but maybe I’m just missing the perspective of an outside casual fan and the allure of the Ohtani-led Dodgers aren’t what I think it is.
Sports Media Rights Valuations
I connected with a proven professional heavily involved in the media rights negotiation over at the PGA TOUR this last week. It really opened my eyes to the media landscape within sports and how it will potentially look drastically different in the coming years.
Take, for example, the PGA Tour. They recently began to a new rights agreement with CBS, NBC and Disney (ESPN+). It’s the first time (with ESPN+) they’ve gone direct-to-consumer (DTC) and we’re starting to see a lot of these streaming platforms get involved for the first time with many sports. Look at YouTube, Netflix, Peacock, and Prime Video with the NFL. Netflix has a piece of the World Baseball Classic in 2026. MLB.tv allows baseball fans to get games through the MLB app. There’s a ton of change happening with how fans get the games.
The costs of media rights is rising too. Look at the NBA’s 11-year, $76 billion deal. The entire NFL’s rights package sits at over $100 billion. Big leagues like these will just continue to play off each other and raising the price. We’re gonna see shorter term deals because one league will say… “well the NBA got this money, we should get this money,” and then it will create a cycle of sorts until who knows when?
We’ll see some more change soon within the world of college football. With the Big 10 and SEC threatening to change the landscape of college football even more than it has, media will be left wondering what to do. It will be positive change for them, though. Who knows what the new college football will look like come a few years from now. Will it be more highly regarded schools matching up against each other each week? Could be if what I’ve read about gains traction.
I just wanted to write about it because it piques my interest as something to monitor going forward. How will AI play into this? What will happen to the regional networks (RSNs)? There’s so many possibilities to look forward to and hypothesize about that I’ll definitely be following this trend.
Who’s “good” at football?
The third and final thought I spent a considerable amount of free time on this week was the question of “who is good at football?”
I came upon a YouTube channel, Michael MacKelvie, who does really fascinating and entertaining videos on sports. He posted one that asked this exact question. There are so many moving parts on a football field, it differs itself from other sports. Baseball is pitcher versus hitter under a magnifying glass until the hitter makes contact and the defense comes into play. Basketball has less participants and isn’t as much of a “team” sport as basketball fans would like to think. I don’t know too much about hockey but I guess that’s the closest thing we have to football?
Think about it: running backs rely on a good offensive line. Good offensive lineman rely on the other four lineman to do their job. Offensive lineman also get matched up by opposing edge rushers based on coach game plan on where to exploit weak links. Linebackers and safeties rely on a ton of other factors. Quarterbacks, despite needing the arm, also are “graded” differently based on the team they play on, the situations they’re put in, and more. Wide receivers versus cornerbacks are the only two real positions where we get a 1v1 matchup in isolation. Even still, similar to o-line and pass rush, matchups come into play.
So really, what I’m learning is that wide receivers and edge rushers are the two positions that have gained more notice as positions with the most agency (there’s probably a better word?). What I mean is they determine a lot more for themselves than other positions might. Front offices have caught on to this as well, judging by the contracts edge rushers and wide receivers are getting these days. But still, we’ve seen teams do just fine without “good” receivers.
That leads to the head scratching point of this all…What makes a player “good”? Is there a way to determine that objectively?
Obviously, we know that Saquon Barkley is “good.” We knew it when he was in college, we knew it when he was in New York and we still know it as he’s in Philly. But why?
We know that Malik Nabers is “good” (sorry Giants fans). We knew it in college and we still know it now. Statistics won’t tell us that story, though, because he’s likely drawing the toughest opposing cornerback and drawing more attention.
So is it athleticism? Ability to gain more than expected? Some other X-factor?
Maybe there’s an answer to this that’s more obvious than I think, but it’s had my head doing laps for a bit now. I’m eager to see where this lack of knowing leads me.
I’m also curious to hear if anyone reading this has anything to say on any of these matters. So please, feel free to leave a comment or send me a message about it.
Inner Half 