The 5.5 Hole

I wrote a three-part series earlier this year outlining my opinion on what baseball needs to do to increase its popularity. In the first part I explored attendance figure and concluded that totals have held pretty steady. Well forget the numbers. If you open a newspaper, go online, or flip on the television it seems doomsdayers are pointing to the fans' complete abandonment of baseball. They will show you pictures of empty ball parks. They will pick and choose teams, citing all-time lows in attendance. They will pull out the smoke and mirrors, and they may even ask Chris Angel to freak your mind.

The fact is, as pointed out in a completely unrelated Sports Illustrated article, average attendance league-wide is down just 14 fans. 14! Since last year how many more people have lost jobs? How many have taken pay cuts? And baseball has only lost an average of 14 fans per game.

If we were to just look at the teams struggling in attendance, of course we will see a problem. But what about the other teams? What about Pittsburgh who, until last month, was drawing more fans on average than they have in a decade. They've had more sell-outs this season than they have since the 90's. What about San Francisco? As of August 10th they had sold out 60 consecutive home games. What about Boston? You'd have to damn near hit the lottery to afford a scalped ticket to the constantly sold-out Fenway Park. How about St. Louis or Minnesota? Or the Angels and Rangers?

It's popular to believe baseball is dying. It's trendy to throw certain teams' attendance figures around as proof of the sport's decline. But popularity and trends are rarely built on honest fact. Think for yourself, do the research, and know that while it's not the most popular sport, baseball is surviving a terrible economy just fine.

How bad do the Angels want to win the division and face the Yankees or Red Sox in the Division Series?  They plan to pitch not one, but two pitchers on three days rest.  In the regular season.  This weekend.  Reportedly, Jered Weaver and Ervin Santana will both start on three days rest for the first time in their careers.  Watch out Rangers, the Angels are in it to win it.

In a study conducted by John Charles Bradbury and Sean Forman, both PhD's, the correlation between pitches thrown and days off for pitchers was examined.  The results were slightly skewed by the relatively small sample size of pitchers who threw on three days rest between 1998 and 2009, but based on that sample size, days off seemed to have little affect on the pitcher's performances.  So why do we see three days rest so rarely?  Why do managers insist on a five-man rotation?  The best answer seems to be the fear of the unknown.  To date, there is no concrete scientific evidence to support a correlation between lesser performance on short rest than full rest.  There is also no evidence to support an increased risk of injury.  Pitch counts seem to be slightly more correlated to both, but only apply to a given game.  Still, the possibility of injury or reduced performance handcuffs many managers.

Mike Scioscia intends to buck that trend.  At least for a weekend.  That goes to show how important this weekend is.  A three game series between the Angels and the Rangers starts tonight, and the Angels intend to throw three aces at Texas.  Dan Haren is scheduled to start tonight, Ervin Santana tomorrow, and Jered Weaver Sunday.  That's a pretty formidable run of pitchers, especially considering the slim 2-game lead the Rangers currently hold.  Just how formidable are those three pitchers?

The three pitchers have combined for a 2.72 ERA, 473 strikeouts to only 120 walks, and a combined 14.3 WAR. 

In the hitter-friendly, designated hitter filled American League, the Angels have one of the best three man rotations in recent memory.  If the Rangers aren't careful, they could wake up Monday looking up at the Angels who have suddenly stolen first place right out from under them. 

With a season of run-away division and Wild Card races, this weekend's contest between the Angels and the Rangers shapes up to be the most meaningful series of the year.  So if you can take your mind off Hurricane Irene for a moment, settle in for play-off baseball in August.

The Yankees and Red Sox entered last night's contest in a perfect tie.  Winning percentage, wins, losses.  On August 5th, this should have been one of the biggest (if not the biggest) series of the regular season.  The nation should have been glued to their TV screen whether they loved or hated either team.  The President himself should have been peaking in or getting game updates from Secret Service.

Instead, the series doesn't matter.  The Yankees won last night and took a one game lead entering Saturday.  Barring a miraculous come-back from the Angels or the Rays, both the Yankees and the Red Sox are locks for the postseason.  So what does this series actually mean, besides another chance for ESPN to flex its love of "The Rivarly?"

Let's end the season right now and take a look at the match-ups:

The Yankees would win the East and would face off with Detroit in the Division Series.
Boston would take the Wild Card and would travel to Texas.

Now, let's flip this and say the Red Sox win the next two games, then end the season there:

The Red Sox would win the East and would host the Tigers.
The Yankees would win the Wild Card and take on Texas in Arlington.

So, essentially what this series decides is who travels to Texas and who hosts Detroit.  For many Yankees fans, that could be a big deal.  Just look at what happened last season when New York took on Texas.  However, in the overall play-off picture both New York and Boston will have the two best records at the close of the season.  They both have better teams than Detroit, and probably have better teams than Texas.

The rivalry this year isn't about making the postseason, it's about play-off scenarios.  For that reason, the play-off structure needs to change.  Talks of adding another Wild Card team are great, but there needs to be a better reward for winning the division.  This isn't a new discussion by any means, but it seems to be magnified in this "larger than life" series between the two titans of the American League East.

Many people are arguing for a one-game play-off between the two Wild Card teams (assuming the League does add another Wild Card in each league).  In this scenario teams would hopefully battle more for the division title rather than settling for the Wild Card.  No one wants to play a one-game series.  However, even a three-game series would lead teams down the right path of competition.  Look at the College World Series.  A three game series barely gauges the talent on the field and allows for flukes.  No team entering the play-offs wants to be knocked out by a fluke.

Yankees and Red Sox fans can occupy themselves this weekend with their nationally-televised rivalry of little consequence.  In the mean time, I will be paying attention to the race between the Diamondbacks and the Giants, the race between the Indians and the Tigers, and the race between the Angels and Rangers.