WBC: WTF?

by grantfunk on Mar 3, 2009 2:24 PM EST Comment 58 comments

While I've got a pretty good read on NYRoyal's take on the WBC, what does everyone else think about it? Is this a fantastic PR tool to increase worldwide reception on MLB, increasing it's fanbase and recuritment spectrum or just a distraction from team building during spring training? It may be a tad off topic, but with nine royals playing, I thought I'd ask people who know far, far more about baseball than me.

0 recs | Comment 58 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: wbc, royals, nyroyal, remidation, Kansas City Royals

Comments

It's a smart move

to increase the worldwide popularity of the sport.

Spring Training is the only realistic time it can be held with most (if not all) games being played in the Northern Hemisphere.

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Mar 3, 2009 2:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

i don't particularly care for it

when it can be seen as detrimental for some of the MLB players preparations for the season.

These international contests seem to lose value when all of the best talent in the world is already competing against each other on a regular basis. I am interested in seeing Yu Darvish and the prospect whose name I forget from South Africa, but I’d rather everyone be in camp preparing for the 2009 season.

by 9il on Mar 3, 2009 2:36 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

I'm not particularly interested in increasing the market for Red Sox caps and Jeter jerseys in Euorpe, Africa and Asia

That creates more revenue for MLB owners, but that doesn’t improve anything for fans, or the game.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 2:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Depends on what you mean by "the game"

Creating more worldwide appeal, getting more people interested in the game means not only more of a revenue pool for the owners and the players, but also will cause more people to play the game, increasing the overall talent pool. Doesn’t that improve the game?

Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!

by cmkeller on Mar 3, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

First, increasing the revenue for owners and therefore, to some degree for players is good how? Really, other than increasing the net worth of owners and players, how is this good for fans? Second, does increasing the overall talent pool increase one’s enjoyment of the game? If there were 10% more pitchers who could throw a fastball over 90 mph, would that make for a more enjoyable baseball experience?

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 4:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm...

so better talent doesnt make for more enjoyment? I think your hatred for the WBC is very irrational.

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 4:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Minimally better play

Do you think the amount of increased interest in baseball that the WBC will engender is going to significantly increase major league talent? Please.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 5:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

All it takes is one really good pitcher to come out of South Africa or something...

to make my enjoyment of baseball that much greater. Find me another Pedro somewhere and this whole WBC thing is well worth it.

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

One great pitcher out of South Africa is going to make you enjoy MLB significantly more?

I don’t get that. Subtract any current star from the game, and I wouldn’t enjoy it one bit less.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 5:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gotta disagree -

NHL and NBA is a great example of world-wide players coming into and enriching a US league.

Knowing what kind of player Ichiro is and how much he means to MLB, do you think we’d be better off without him? At some point, someone exported baseball to Japan. Why not now do it to the world?

The Snozberries taste like Snozberries

by labbadabba on Mar 3, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs

thats what I'm saying...

its just a crazy position to take that the game will not be better when globally expanded…it really is one of the crazier positions on anything i’ve ever seen on here

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

When one of those Indian pitchers the Pirates signed becomes a star, I'm really going to start enjoying baseball

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 5:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I sorta see your point

Its the bury my head in the sand argument.

Its like saying, I really love my Hyundai just the way it is, meanwhile your buddy is pointing at that shiney new Lexus accross the street. But you’ve never heard of a Lexus before, besides, your little Elantra runs great.

The Snozberries taste like Snozberries

by labbadabba on Mar 3, 2009 6:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm, not real good subject/verg agreement there

but I’m sure you get the gist…

The Snozberries taste like Snozberries

by labbadabba on Mar 3, 2009 6:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, if you think MLB is currently a Hyundai and that more international players will turn it into a Lexus, and that the WBC will give rise to that kind of improvement in the quality of MLB. Lots of flawed assumptions there.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 7:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

the only flawed assumption is that...

introducing baseball to a large part of the world wont improve the game.

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 7:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

How much?

Minimally? Significantly? Did you notice in his analogy that the difference between what is and what would be was the difference between a Hyundai and a Lexus? That’s quite an assumption.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 11:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

people more than likely thought the same thing...

when latin players were breaking in. I’m sure nobody had a clue that about half of baseball would be of latin descent….its just stupid to say…‘ahhh…fuck it…our players are good enough, why try to find better elsewhere’

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 11:24 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs

It's not really

about “finding better elsewhere”. Better ballplayers aren’t just found in “other areas” or by ethnicity because they are currently “undiscovered”. It is about broadening interest in the game so that youngsters start playing it in other areas and over a long time building a larger base to draw athletes from. A larger pool means, again over time, more competition and it takes better athletes to make it to the top. Thereby, again over time, the major leagues gains more and better talent.

Will the WBC do that? Heck, I don’t know. Just like here, baseball has to compete for participant and viewer attention against a lot of other sports, especially soccer in most other parts of the world. Is the target audience I’m talking about even going to SEE this thing?

Fourth to First

by kabrink on Mar 4, 2009 1:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

International players

have substantially improved the NBA… another uniquely American sport that showed to have appeal in other countries. I don’t know if the WBC can be the vehicle to export baseball further, but I’m more than willing to give it a shot. I only think the current format needs to be re-evaluated.

by SpfldDiehard on Mar 5, 2009 4:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If they are really good....

it’s going to make a significant difference. Maybe I’m weird, but I am a baseball fan and want to see the best possible baseball players out there…be it an indian, a russian, a south african or a nigerian…Would you have been anti-integration as well? That Jackie Robinson bum….making us broaden us horizons and bringing us better baseball

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 6:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm sure you're being sarcastic about the pitchers from India

but I really would think that was pretty awesome.

by andrewmiller on Mar 3, 2009 7:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I thoroughly enjoyed watching Pedro pitch when he was in his prime...

yes, it makes that much of a difference…I’m starting to feel the same way about Felix and Zack when he’s on

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

so, you're saying that increased revenue...

that is split amongst all the teams therefore evening out the playing field is BAD? You hate the yankees b/c you feel that they have an unfair advantage. Now, Bud does something that may level the playing field…however marginally, and you dont like it?

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 4:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

so, you’re saying that increased revenue…that is split amongst all the teams therefore evening out the playing field is BAD?

How much does an increase in equally divided revenues level the playing field? Yeah, marginal is right.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 5:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So, I've pointed out two positive attributes about the WBC....

and really, there arent any negatives…

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Negligible positives, at best. And then there are the negatives...

These guys aren’t preparing for the major league season as they should. It interferes with spring training. Some guys will play much more than they otherwise would have, increasing injury risk. Some will play much less, giving them less of an opportunity to get to 100% by opening day. Some of these guys have new teammates this year and would benefit from actually playing with them for a month in spring training.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 5:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ahh...so now team chemistry matters?

It doesnt when Jose Guillen is going nuts on teammates and such, but it does when taking BP?

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Did anybody mention team chemistry?

Double play combinations actually need to work together. They become better as they play together more. First basemen and pitchers need to work on GB’s to first where the pitcher is covering. Pitchers and catchers need to work together. OFers need to play together to work on communication on flyballs. OFers and IFers need to work together for the same reason. And, of course, there’s more. It isn’t about chemistry. It’s about X’s and O’s.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Mar 3, 2009 5:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

the new teammates thing isnt about chemistry?

These are professionals. They can get the cutoff assignments. They can learn the signals. They can learn to turn a double play…its very insignificantly different from person to person. This can all be done in the week before the WBC and the two weeks after.

That being said, I think it does hurt someone like Teahen…but he’s not being forced to go. He’s choosing to go.

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 6:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Uh

This spring training is record length, to make up for WBC abscences.

The Allard Baird of incisive internet discourse.

by kcbottom9th on Mar 3, 2009 6:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Good concept

I like it more than spring training, although I am scared shitless about Mexicutioner blowing his arm out for a horrible Mexican team.

Also, it has helped me turn on Mark Teahen even more, so there ya go with that.

Banny being Banny.

by JobDDT on Mar 3, 2009 2:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

that was kinda my concern

although i am eyeing a sweet soria/mexico jersey (for when i need a break from blue).

The first thing I know about someone in a KC hat is that they're loyal.

by grantfunk on Mar 3, 2009 2:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I had no interest in the first one

But I find myself mildly interested in this one.

Do you guys cheer for USA? Cheer for Royals? Cheer for baseball in general?

I honestly cheer against the USA generally because I like underdogs. I think that makes me an unpatriotic American.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 3, 2009 2:58 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

I cheer for

Canada first, by birth, USA second, by marriage, and any Royals as well.

And i like it. It is more interesting than Spring Training, especially early ST. I don’t even care about the development of the game, it’s just fun.

The Allard Baird of incisive internet discourse.

by kcbottom9th on Mar 3, 2009 3:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Shouldn't you be cheering against the Dominican?

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Mar 3, 2009 3:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

They're still an underdog country

The team may not be, but that country doesn’t have a whole lot going for it.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 3, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Then you should be rooting against Cuba

Socialism: the best economic system ever

Univeral Health Care: sure sign that a country has made it, any country that doesn’t have this is a horrible place to live and everyone smart should leave

Awesome record on human rights: sure, there were concentration camps, but it was for getting rid of parasites. And forced labor for the benefit of developing the New Man is justified.

Hates the U.S.: Sure to gain the approval of tenured radicals everywhere.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Mar 3, 2009 3:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

interesting

point of view.

I just got back from your mom's basement.

by Warden11 on Mar 3, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I actually do cheer against Cuba

Because they’re usually dominant in international competition, and unfairly so, and because I do tend to cheer against brutal repressive regimes.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Mar 3, 2009 5:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ya I agree

I wasn’t interested in the last one until I saw the Mexican team do a victory lap in Dodger Stadium. Wasn’t really interested in that.

I’ll be rooting for Aviles to be WBC MVP. Also I hope the Lindsey kid and his 16 yo Twin teammate get a chance to face Adrian Gonzalez

I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal.

by kcscoliny on Mar 3, 2009 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

if you like to cheer for underdogs...

you really should cheer for america…

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 4:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I cheer for Japan because I want the winner of the World Series to play the winner of the Japan Series

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Mar 3, 2009 5:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

WW2 all over again

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Mar 3, 2009 5:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess I kinda cheer for USA

but mostly I just tune it to watch quality ball. It was fun to watch in 2006. There’s a different feel to the games.

The Snozberries taste like Snozberries

by labbadabba on Mar 3, 2009 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed.

I enjoyed the first one and I’m pretty excited about this one.

I just got back from your mom's basement.

by Warden11 on Mar 3, 2009 5:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Down to eight Royals now: Cruz is out

I’m pretty excited about it. I’m all for ‘high-stakes’ exhibitions with decent-to-great players giving some semblance of their all, which is why I still love the All-Star Game. I’ll actually watch several games of this, whereas I’d never actually tune in to spring training games.

by andrewmiller on Mar 3, 2009 3:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I like the WBC

but not because of any worldwide PR trash, but because I’m an Olympic fanboy. I love the idea of seeing teams comprised of a country’s best players. You may say that the best players are already facing each other, but they’re facing each other as clubs. But as much as I love the other sports in Olympics, they suck for baseball because really it’s just the best minor leaguers facing off against each other. Whoopdee-doo. And it’s getting kicked out of the olympics anyway.

Also, I like seeing baseball in March. Spring Training is nice, but before this year with MLB Network, I didn’t have much chance to see spring training games on TV.

Kansas City Royals: your 2006 and 2007 NL Central champions!

by mazoboom on Mar 3, 2009 5:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

totally agree

Don’t have a lot more to add here.

I just got back from your mom's basement.

by Warden11 on Mar 3, 2009 5:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Very low interest rate

I mean, I might watch part of a game or two if they are on when I’m channel surfing – but honestly, if a Royals ST game was on at the same time, it would be NO CONTEST. I’d definitely be watching the Royals.

Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!

by loyal2sdad on Mar 3, 2009 5:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I wish I were more interested in it

I don’t know why I’m not. Although the execution is imperfect for various reasons, I like the general idea.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Mar 3, 2009 5:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'm stoked

Of course, I don’t usually get to see baseball games on TV because I live in Iowa, but the idea of following a team from game to game is nifty.

Pecota, watch over us.

by castille on Mar 3, 2009 6:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

What?

Don’t you get the ESPN Sunday and Wednesday Boston Games of the Week? What more can you wish for?

Fourth to First

by kabrink on Mar 3, 2009 9:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Weird Timing

I’d be all for an after the season tournament instead of before.

1)2-3 months injuries don’t kill the MLB team
2)players are better prepared.

by playingwithfire on Mar 3, 2009 8:05 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

one more thing

currently the WBC is too much of a joke of a tournament.

I really do think the American “dream team” with everybody participating can be beaten by some foreign team in baseball too. But unless everybody participate, we’ll never know.

by playingwithfire on Mar 3, 2009 8:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I love the WBC

But in order to realistically reach the goal of the WBC which is spread baseball-love and promote it, countries like Austrailia, China, Africa, and the Netherlands would HAVE to win in order for the popularity to shoot up in those countries for the sport.
If I’m not mistaken the winning country recieves prize money for their “federation” so I’m sure this money is used for the respective countries baseball programs.

It also increases the scouting attempts to bring in players that participate. I’m sure alot of people had their eyes on the Korean team in 2006. Although it hasn’t translated I’m sure it helps.

Besides the fact I love it, it increases the player pool in the future so to me that always helps.

Also doesn’t hurt that alot of the prospects we read about whether it’s on our team or other teams, we can take a look at playing and making evaluations on our own.

by Royal from Queens on Mar 3, 2009 8:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Italy

Why Italy got a team baffles me. It seems to me that the only requirement of playing for Italy is that your name ends with a vowel. It was like this in 2006 and I just took a peak at the birthplaces of the Italian team and they are all Californians . . . at least most of them, some are from New York. Even the Dutch can provide its own players, whats the problem Italy?

Mr. Weatherstone

by Mr. Weatherstone on Mar 4, 2009 10:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs