Some Slight Criticisms on the MLB Network

by thebaddancingraysfan on Jan 8, 2009 3:34 PM EST Comment 41 comments

First off, I am happy to have the MLB Network. I find some of the programming fun to watch. Also, I am rather impressed with how well Joe McGraine doing on the hot stove.

With that being said, I really feel that there are few things that the MLB network should be doing that they are not. They have to mention anything significant on the minor leaguers. I think they should have some sort of special about the minor leagues. Should the MLB Network have a nightly special? No, but a weekly special would suffice.

Third, I feel the MLB Network should be talking about the Caribbean winter leagues more. With the talent that is being displayed their should be some sort of update on the players that are playing currently, and would it kill anyone to broadcast a game in Caribbean winter leagues?

Lastly, their should be something about the kids heading into the draft? Who to look for? Who is making a splash. Who will be the no.1 draft pick? Along with that maybe the MLB Network can special highlighting draft picks who made it and who did not.

All and all, I think the MLB Network is good thing. I watched the broadcast of Don Larson's perfect game with my dad when the MLB Network re aired it. It was awesome to see for the first time. What do you think? Anyone else feel like myself? Or am I out in left field on this one?

0 recs | Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

They'll probably cover some stuff

on the minor leagues and draft when it comes that time.

Hello.

by killa3312 on Jan 8, 2009 3:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'd agree with a lot of this

Especially this:

All and all, I think the MLB Network is good thing. I watched the broadcast of Don Larson’s perfect game with my dad when the MLB Network re aired it. It was awesome to see for the first time. What do you think? Anyone else feel like myself? Or am I out in left field on this one?

It was great.

I do wish they would do more about the minors, prospects, etc. and a SABR show. They have plans to televise minor-league games, so I imagine that will come. I’d imagine the product will improve immensely as time goes by.

by rglass44 on Jan 8, 2009 3:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

24 hours is a lot of time to fill. ESPN can’t do it without showing 8hours of SC everyday. I haven’t really sat down and watched the NFLN so I am not sure how they come off, but that is a ton of time. They need to play 3 classic games everyday for starters. Theres10-13 hours right there.

Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up that much.

~George Costanza~

by Sandy Kazmir on Jan 8, 2009 3:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh also I've heard they will have 8 hours of hilights every night

Suck it BB2N.

Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up that much.

~George Costanza~

by Sandy Kazmir on Jan 8, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Read

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=1143

by Erik Hahmann on Jan 8, 2009 3:43 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Viva la proletariat

Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up that much.

~George Costanza~

by Sandy Kazmir on Jan 8, 2009 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I’m expecting a lot of good things from the network in terms of expanded coverage of all things baseball. Unfortunately, objectivity and critical expression of any sort concerning MLB ownership seems exceedingly unlikely and par for the course from MLB media.

by RATW on Jan 8, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I caught some of the Hot Stove show earlier

They had a discussion about the A’s offseason and Billy Beane’s philosophy that was about as deep as the floor of a men’s restroom. They need to throw at least one Sabr guy on there to balance it out and give it another dimension.

by atlantaray on Jan 8, 2009 5:14 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

Rec'd

Give me SABR!!!

B Rad the Ray Fan

by B Ray on Jan 8, 2009 5:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

NE1 WANNA SABR KEKEKEKEKE

by kericr on Jan 8, 2009 5:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'll do it.

I have a face for TV. I’m wasting it here in my granparents’ basement behind this screen.

by rglass44 on Jan 8, 2009 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

MLB Network?

What channel is that on?

The Rays Party

by therayspartyleader on Jan 8, 2009 8:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

213 directv

by atlantaray on Jan 8, 2009 11:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Channel 86

If you have FIOS

In the name of Shinji Mori, we shall win!

by thebaddancingraysfan on Jan 9, 2009 1:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If you're in the Tampa Bay area it's 159 on Brighthouse

by Erik Hahmann on Jan 9, 2009 8:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gotta agree BDRF

The Don Larsen game was a treat.

Also agree that some more coverage of minors, prospects, etc. would be nice, but these things would cost – staff, production, etc. Easier to fill time with “reruns” at this point. They may well add content when the audience outside of the true believers kicks during the reg seadon and some ad revenue kicks in.

Hoping for the best!

by nyyfaninlaaland on Jan 8, 2009 9:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

You have some great points.

It wouldn’t be too costly to show the AAA all-star game from this year, or in years past. For that matter,show some old All-Star Futures games. I think that would be fun.

But, you have some good points.

In the name of Shinji Mori, we shall win!

by thebaddancingraysfan on Jan 9, 2009 1:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Does anyone else have Brighthouse?

I get this channel on 159 but I was told we’d get HD version on 744 and I do not have that.

Rays 2009 Slogan: "Come back with your shield or on it"

by PriceMultiCyYoungs on Jan 9, 2009 7:13 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

It's not available yet

by Erik Hahmann on Jan 9, 2009 8:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I dont know

I am kind of liking almost everythign they show

Cathedrals of the Game where they go indepth about all the ball parks, the Don Larsen game was awesome, they are showing an 18 hour miniseries every Tuesday that covers the entire history of baseball up until 1992 — this is goign to be awesome. They have that Prime 9 show where the debate the top 9 alltime of different baseball catgories. They have showed qute a few Rays games. I actually like mostly verything they are showing, and it seems they are going ot be adding a lot more

I love the Hot Stove show every night, I would be pszd if it was only a weekly show. They actually did a mock-free agency for Cincinatti, Pitsburgh and Sad Diego in one segment and talked baout what moves would be benficial for them at this point, etc. I thought that was awesome. I have always thought that ESPN should talk about all the small market and sucky teams more, when it comes to NFL and MLB. There are great baseball stories in every city, and great debates that can be had. No matte rif you are a Yankee fan or Boston fan if you love baseball you will enjoy that tyoe of coverage

Im not sure how much coevrage could be done of the Dominican league, or how much interest there would be. The games arent that competitive and a lot of the players arent that good. I just dont think there would be much interest, or much coverage that could be done.

College baseball hasnt even started yet, I think when the season starts getting underway they could probably start covering some of the emerging talent and high school prospects. That would be cool

by Rays4242 on Jan 9, 2009 2:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

As far as I know

They have no deal to cover any college baseball, although I would be in favor of it if they do, even though it’s not MLB. It’s not like a licensing deal to cover college baseball would cost much.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Jan 9, 2009 2:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

As far as showing full games... probably not any time soon, depending on the conference

For example, the latest SEC TV package has ESPN with the rights to broadcast regular season SEC baseball games on ESPNU and conference tournament games on ESPN and ESPN2 beginning in 2010 until 2025. The Big Ten has their own sports network. Other conferences have pre-existing regional sports network agreements. Etc.

But I would hope they have some sort of individual prospect coverage leading up to the draft.

I do expect there will be a lot of minor league game broadcasts and general minor league coverage.

by RATW on Jan 9, 2009 6:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Remember those fake press conferences that Steve Phillips did

Wow what a colossal fucktastrophe. If there is anyone I hate more over at that farce of a channel it would have to be that doucher. Just the thought of those segments makes me want to throw myself off a cliff into a pit of spikes and the pit is filled with pirahana’s and Wolverine.

Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up that much.

~George Costanza~

by Sandy Kazmir on Jan 9, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The one thing I don't like so far

is the Hot Stove because by and large they talk sound bite nonsense and make no real effort to get beyond the obvious and the cliched. It seems to me they are missing a real opportunity here to season their programming with some real analysts and interesting conversation.

As for the other shows I have seen, some are fine but most are pure hyperbolic, breathless commentary. I like to wallow in that stuff, so I have no objection although it does get really boring after a while hearing the same pablum about every player they feature. But fine, it provides baseball pictures even during the winter and that is a good thing no matter how thin the substance really is.

by bobr on Jan 9, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs

But fine, it provides baseball pictures even during the winter and that is a good thing no matter how thin the substance really is.

Rec’d for being grounded in reality.

Anyway, as I was lying in the puddle, I think I may have found a way for us to get Bonds and Griffey, and we wouldn't have to give up that much.

~George Costanza~

by Sandy Kazmir on Jan 9, 2009 2:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

is the Hot Stove because by and large they talk sound bite nonsense and make no real effort to get beyond the obvious and the cliched.

Preach brother!

The thing is, ESPN has made collasal bank doing this; and they do an exceptional job doing so. I’m looking for something different, fresh, new, and most importantly, more intelligent. MLB is so far, failing to deliver on this front. If I want to watch Baseball Tonight during the offseason, I’ll watch Baseball Tonight during the off season, not Hot Stove.

by kericr on Jan 9, 2009 3:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, that is exactly the point.

I do not blame them. They need advertisers and “good” television means being slick, means short pieces and conventional wisdom masquerading as expertise. I just keep thinking that if it is 24/7, there might be some slight concession to the unconventional and to considering the niche of people who can argue that Andy Sonnanstine is a better pitcher than Matsuzaka, and can do it with some information and logic.

“Hot Stove” could be such a show because it is fundamentally analysis, and a full hour of it. I could even be grateful for one 15 minute segment of it in which they turn it over to intelligent analysts who discuss rather than try to top each other with zingers. Hell, they could introduce it each episode as “And now we go into mom’s basement to see what the nerds are thinking”. I don’t care if they create a set with chintz curtains and hummel figurines. Just 15 minutes in which perhaps they take only 1 transaction and review it from different angles.

by bobr on Jan 9, 2009 5:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No offense to anyone

which means Im about to offend everyone, but I’ll take Reynolds and Magraine talking baseball over some “nerds in their moms basements” from somewhere like DRaysBay who think Sonny is better than Dice-K and can only back it up with walks

Thats not to say this site doesnt provide many great things, because it does, but Reynolds and Magraine’s insights are much more enlightening

by Rays4242 on Jan 9, 2009 7:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

There's nothing wrong with his arm

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Jan 9, 2009 9:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I can't imagine MLB ever allowing someone to be critical of any of their teams on air or on their websites.

If you put a Keith Law, a Dave Cameron, a Rob Neyer on one of these shows and ask them what they think of the Royals off-season, and then censor the reply, you’re still left with “Holy crap, godawful.” That discourages business, and the MLB won’t allow that.

Instead, Reynolds can talk highly of Bloomquist’s hustle and grit, of Jacobs “big hit ability”, and of Crisps’ winning mentality. And when the Royals win 75 games? Hey, they were simply learning how to win, and when they don’t do much in 2010, the intended audience will have forgotten what Reynolds said.

The players can bring insight into things like, um, actually playing, but in terms of talent evaluation, not many possess that quality.

by R.J. Anderson on Jan 9, 2009 11:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

There is the famous statement that

nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. It may sound clever and funny, but I think its cynicism is not really true. On the contrary, the effort to elevate discussion, if done properly, can be very successful.

I think you are right about MLB’s fears, but I think THEY are wrong. Far from discouraging business, I think honest criticisms made with intelligence will encourage fans to follow teams and to be engaged. I think the stimulation intelligent analysis provides increases interest, sparks debate and livens up the game. I know that teams often develop rules to discourage public criticism at games (as with nasty banners, for example), but imagine what would happen to fan interest if they disallowed booing. In a sense that is what MLB is doing if it does not permit on-air criticism of its product.

Hot Stove is by its very nature an analytical enterprise. The whole point is to evaluate how a team is helped or hurt by a deal or a non-deal. The entire excitement of the off-season is debating who to acquire and what to give up for him and developing reasoning to examine those positions. What point is there to have a hot stove program that doesn’t explore the very essence of its title, that relies on cliches and conventional and uninformative generalizations?

Instead they develop phony arguments and spice them up with lots of yelling and joshing and mock insults. It is condescending and pandering, and it seems to me that fans should be insulted to be treated that way. When Magrane made a rather innocuous but reasonable point that the Pirates were not ready to contend in 2009, the response by Millar was about as idiotic as it could be. (The players have to approach each game thinking they will win. Wow! What insight! How relevant to the question of whether the Pirates are building a contender!) And Reynolds concludes by patting him on the back for his excellent analysis while laughingly suggesting that Magrane take a more positive attitude. This is in a segment considering the immediate future of the teams in the NL Central. Everyone has young players ready to contribute and a positive attitude in the upcoming season. Thank goodness I have MLB’s Hot Stove to inform me of that.

Oh yes, and with Tejada, Lee and Berkman, Houston has the best #3-4-5 combination in the majors. That was just tossed into the conversation with no further consideration but with general approbation.

by bobr on Jan 9, 2009 11:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

how much Baseball Tonight do you see in January?

Maybe there is a reason the content is lacking right now

I mean how much coverage can they provide when 99% of the league is on vacation?

The Hot Stove has covered a number of things that I found interesting. Like bringing Jimmy Rollins in to analyze and reenact Jackie Robinsons controversial steal of home in the 1955 World Series, with Barry Larkin playing the part of catcher Yogi Berra and Harold reynolds and Al Leiter as the pitcher and 3B.

They brought Kevin Millar in to show and talk about the strategy of hitting the ball to LF in Fenway and the advantages it has, and he talked about how Ortiz has gotten so good at placing it out there, and how Manny always struggled because he was such a great oppo hitter

They had Scott Boras in studio talking about all kinds of things.

San Diego, Pitt, and Cincy getting coverage in January when their GMs mine as well be on vacation and completely inactive.

And guys like Joe Magraine (whos being doing great) and Harold Reynolds providing their insights and abilities to digest and explain the game in very sensible and logical ways (get sick of some of the yahoos on ESPN who come nowhere near these guys), and Barry Larkin and Al Leiter were good as rookie commentators also

I love it, I cant wait for how much better it will get especially when they cover every team’s spring training like they show in their promotions.

by Rays4242 on Jan 9, 2009 7:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Perhaps I should not have been so jocular with the basement comment.

As I said, there are plenty of things on the network I like, and I do not begrudge them the concern to become popular. I also liked the Boras piece, because I think he is an interesting man, although I cannot remember one challenging question posed to him. Essentially, it became a forum for him to present his views, which is fine, but not terribly edgy. I like Leiter very much; he is one of the best color commentators I have ever heard. The other pieces you mention were also worthwhile and interesting, although I disagree entirely about Reynolds who I find worse than useless.

But here is something to consider. This is a 100% baseball network. Sabermetrics is no longer a fringe movement. It is a major contributor to the international conversation of baseball. It is not just websites. It is books and presence in just about every major league front office. It is finding its way into mainstream columns and referenced at least indirectly even in broadcast booths. Even ESPN has hired sabermetrically inclined analysts. Its influence on thinking about baseball is now virtually ubiquitous.

I cannot fathom that a 100% baseball network does not set aside time for something so integral to its subject. It is like a news program ignoring any stories concerning Latin America or a nature channel avoiding all mention of ecologists. Ignoring sabermetric analysis is a form of dereliction of duty no matter whether they believe it will not draw enough viewers or not.

by bobr on Jan 9, 2009 9:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

At the very least

If they have a panel of 4 or 5 guys, like they do, it wouldn’t hurt to have SOMEONE who at least keeps it in the back of their brain, who can at least raise the point when there’s a point to be made. Biggest problem is probably that most of those guys who are a big enough name to be on a show like this are already under contract somewhere else.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Jan 9, 2009 9:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I would love to see a SABR show

Something along the lines of introducing SABR and what its all about and as the show progresses through the months then get into more analysis.

I think if they launched a SABR show and started right in with the analysis it would fail. SABR has a strong loyal following but I dont think it would have the volume of fans to support the show and advertising dollars (not sure if an MLB Network, NFL Network, etc basis advertising prices on the show, not network as a whole)

To me, this would really help introduce SABR to the casual fan that maybe does not read as much online. If they “eased” the casual fan into SABR with a mixture of the traditional, then phased the taditional out over time it would be money baby.

My two cents.

Rays 2009 Slogan: "Come back with your shield or on it"

by PriceMultiCyYoungs on Jan 10, 2009 10:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

A mythbusters type show/segment would work.

But I guess that renders most of their analysts useless.

by R.J. Anderson on Jan 10, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes,

something to shake people up, even to get them mad, but because of reasoned attacks on sacred cows, not because of posturing and shouting. What usually passes for controversy on most shows is someone saying the most ordinary things very loudly and repetitively and claiming that they are ruffling feathers when in reality they are saying nothing. (cf: Steven A. Smith for the archetype.)

Much more maddening for people, and disconcerting, is to find their cherished myths discredited and being unable to muster strong counter-arguments right away. That may drive some people away, but it draws others in.

Actually I would not want to mix the traditional commentators with real analysts. I don’t think creating that kind of circus would be fruitful. Let them compete with each other in separate slots until some reasonable means of fostering serious discussion between them can be developed. I do think the traditional commentators have something to offer to all of us, and I think in a reasonable discussion with real analysts we can learn to respect their contributions just as they may be able to learn to respect those we admire.

by bobr on Jan 10, 2009 11:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

FWIW

On “Prime 9”, they were talking about WHIP and ERA+ when they were talking about the greatest seasons in history. I don’t think I’ve EVER heard those stats used on ESPN on air. So at least they’re more amenable to it, even if they didn’t hire a stats guy for the show.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Jan 13, 2009 8:51 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

You beat me to it.

I did not watch the show but turned it on for a minute and was very impressed that they did refer to ERA+ and seemed about to use it properly. That is very promising. In fact, doing it unobtrusively as they did, simply stating what it is and why they use it, might be the best way to introduce such concepts to a mass audience. It becomes less threatening that way, and gains the imprimatur of mainstream media.

by bobr on Jan 13, 2009 11:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ERA+/IP could make Blylevn a HOF'er

Responding to the WHIP and ERA+ comments I actually saw on ESPN first take that rambling idiot (the guy who aptly calls TO team obliterator) say that SABR ‘people’ should be in control of HOF voting. He mentioned they have a better understanding of statistical analysis that would allow players to be judged in their own era and without the bias of reporters who won’t vote for a guy who would not give them an interview. On the same panel another man mentioned that he asked one of the HOF voters if he voted for Rickey Henderson and he said no because he used to cover rickey and he would take a play off once in a while,,,,ignoring 3k hits and 2k walks and some steals I think…while on another program you see issues like sports editors being able to vote for the HOF, regardless of baseball knowledge or experience (Writing or otherwise), this system is ridiculous.

IF only Harry Carey could be arounde for Kosuke.

by CubFanRaysaddict on Jan 14, 2009 10:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs