A commenter on Cleveland.com prompted me to write a about a thought that ran through my head today. The comment is on the Indians spending in the wake of the Prince Fielder signing:
“The Tribe once complained about the Yankees and Red Sox when talking about competitive imbalance. But now, 3 of the 4 teams in their division are seriously outspending Cleveland. Only the Royals and Tribe are the “penny pinchers”. It’s now clear that we’re one of the few major league teams that simply cannot spend with our peers. This is a wake up call for the Dolans. They either need to step up, or step out.”
This morning I thought about how baseball might be returning to one of the most competitive eras in the history of the majors, 1979 to 1992. In those 14 seasons, there were no repeat World Series champions. Twelve different teams won the title (the Dodgers and Twins winning twice). Twenty-three of the 26 teams made the playoffs at least one time. Teams had plenty of money to spend on free agents, to the extent that offers were close enough that players sometimes decided on where they wanted to live, rather than which team offered the most money.
The last eleven years haven’t been too bad, with nine different teams winning the World Series and 23 of the 30 teams making the playoffs. The majors as a whole is doing very well in terms of shared revenue. National TV contracts and MLBAM feed all franchises a large amount of money. Throw in transfers between rich and poor teams, and the gap in revenue is shrinking. In other words, it’s becoming easier for teams to spend, especially when they are close to a winning team. The big spenders this off-season weren’t the Yankees and Red Sox, but the Angels, Rangers, Tigers and Marlins. It’s very good for the game that more teams are getting involved. In a couple of years, the Cubs and Dodgers will join in, and I suspect Houston won’t be far behind. We’re on the cusp of an outstanding era of competitive balance.
Didn’t the competitive balance of the 1980s have something to do with George Steinbrenner going completely off the rails and running his team into the ground?
If the wealthiest team in the MLB is run reasonably competently, it should be able to claim one of the five playoff spots almost every year and win more than its quota of championships.
That said, I hold the view that too much parity is bad for a sport. You want to have some big beasts that battle it out with each other, and which the smaller animals try different strategies to bring down.
Teams had plenty of money to spend on free agents, to the extent that offers were close enough that players sometimes decided on where they wanted to live, rather than which team offered the most money.
Didn’t that have more to do with collusion than parity?
Plank » I thought the collusion period was rather short, 1987-1988.
Collusion occurred following the 1985, 1986 and 1987 seasons
npbcardguy » I mostly remember it happening after the 1986 season. A new rule was in effect that if a player did not sign with his previous team quickly, he could not sign before May 1. Tim Raines’s season was cut short due to this.
I remember the Red Sox opening the 1987 season with Marc Sullivan (the owner’s son) catching because Rich Gedman couldn’t resign with the team until May 1.
But it did start with the 1985 offseason. There were 35 players who filed for free agency but only four changed teams (and they were the ones who their old teams didn’t want anymore). Kirk Gibson couldn’t find anyone to sign him.