Ryan Spilborghs: Improving September Baseball
Recently, I outlined the problem that September roster expansion poses for many players, coaches and managers. Though the focus now is on the postseason, CBA talks are nearing finalization, so now’s the time to address the subject. I have several suggestions on how to “fix” the competitive integrity in the month of September — along with the other issues I have mentioned.
To begin, the added depth and flexibility of September rosters does have some lessons. I believe first and foremost that a Major League season is too long and that the league should return to the 154-game season. It’s a physical grind to try to play 162 games in 183 days. I understand the revenue involved with TV rights, ticket and concession sales for each game, but other factors need to be considered as well.
Because our sport has made a significant effort to clean up the game with the banning of “amphetamines,” we have seen a dramatic decrease in players playing more than 135 games per season. I am by no means condoning the use of “greenies” to help players play more games — MLB should be commended for its efforts — but the use of the illegal drug was, at one point, simply a necessity for players to physically meet the demands of the game.
The onus on players is to play each game and produce; performance has always been judged by results and the ability to compete in each game. Good nutrition, proper sleep and body maintenance still make it nearly impossible for players to stay on the field in a capacity that is healthy. There is too much travel and there are too many games for these players to maintain a healthy lifestyle. I have the same argument when I view what the NFL has done to their players by adding Thursday night football. The demands of the game, coupled with short windows of recovery, force players to find “means” in which to compete, and those means sometimes toe the line of legality.
For baseball, I firmly believe it’s time to scale back the regular season. There is a precedent dating back to 1961, when baseball played 154 games, and returning to this schedule is imperative for the safety of the players.
In addition to that change, rosters for each MLB team needs to expand as well, from a 25-man roster to a 28-man roster. The increase in three players is significant enough to lighten the burden on starting pitching rotations and bullpens while also giving teams an extra bench player.
I understand that adding three players comes at a cost to Major League owners by increasing payroll, insurance, and pension, while also allowing more players to reach arbitration. However, the current situation harms the product that the league sells. It has been increasingly popular for teams to carry 13 members of the pitching staff, limiting many teams to a four-man bench. The shorter bench becomes a disadvantage (especially for National League teams) when a starting player is nursing a “day-to-day” injury; it becomes only a three-man bench while the injured player recovers.
Without the needed flexibility, the 15-day minimum disabled list stint means that regulars can be pushed harder than they should — possibly leading to more significant injuries — or be kept out longer than they ought to if a DL stint is required. An increased roster size could help prevent starting players from hitting the disabled lists while recovering, because teams will not have to worry about playing with a shorter bench. That would increase competition, especially when the games matter most down the stretch, and allow owners to keep their best players on the field longer.
Having the extra bench player could also allow National League teams can carry a DH-type of player over the course of the season, creating more excitement and helping to even the playing field for NL clubs competing in AL parks during interleague contests. When baseball moved the Houston Astros back to the American League, the NL and the AL were balanced out to include 15 teams apiece, but the byproduct became season-long interleague play.
There are more direct ways in which the financial shift could be offset, too. In order to make up lost revenue from subtracting eight games during the season, the postseason can expand to include a seven-game series after the initial Wild Card play-in games. Currently the division series is a five-game series. Adding two games can help offset some of the lost revenue, and a shorter regular season would leave plenty of flexibility to accommodate them. With some give in the schedule, baseball can also consider starting opening day later in April, or it can start the playoffs sooner so that the postseason doesn’t leak into November, thereby avoiding some of the weather challenges that arise on either spectrum of when season starts or finishes.
My final suggestion deals directly with September roster expansion. Under my proposal, teams would be able to call upon any members of their 40 man roster, but in a way that respects the integrity of the game is at stake in the season’s final month. It’s simple: only 28 of those players should be eligible for each game. Managers and front offices can determine which players will be the active roster on a given day, without being forced to follow the typical optional assignment rules. Pace of play in the month of September should increase, or at least stay status quo with the pace of the regular season, as opposed to games in which we see teams deploy 10 or more pitchers. To be fair to players that aren’t activated for a given night, no player would lose service time if they are placed in the pool of possible active roster members, and they would be allowed participate in all pregame work. The only detriment would be that they would simply not be allowed to dress for that night’s game.
Although this seems like a trite reason, having that many players on the bench during the game disrupts many players in-game behaviors, from warming up to finding a seat on the bench. For the final stretch run of the season, even the smallest of disrupted routines can be very important to players competing during the game.
I love September — the drama of the season unfolding, the surprise of a new player making their first mark, players and teams chasing down goals. My goal isn’t to subtract from that by any means, but to serve the best interests of Major League Baseball, its players and its coaching staffs, now and in the future. The final month of the season should not take place with changed personnel rules when history is at stake. Without taking away from a player earning a chance to compete at the Major League level in September, it needs to be recognized that we also should not take away from how the game is played for the previous five months. As great as the drama of September baseball already is, I would love nothing more than to see baseball implement some changes in the final wave of CBA negotiations to improve this game I so deeply care about.
Player’s Perspective: September Roster Expansion
Ryan Spilborghs is a former big league outfielder. He is currently a color analyst for the Colorado Rockies on Root Sports Rocky Mountain and also works for MLB Network Radio. He came up in the Rockies organization and appeared for the club at the major league level between 2005 and 2011, playing a significant role in Colorado’s 2007 and 2009 postseason runs. Ryan also spent time with the Indians and Rangers organizations in 2012 before finishing out his playing career with Japan’s Seibu Lions in 2013. MLBTR is glad to welcome him as a contributor to our Player’s Perspective series.
Do you love September baseball? How can you not, with the baseball season coming down to the wire? Major League Baseball got it right by adding two extra wild card teams. More teams are in the conversation for a playoff spot than ever before. How many times have you heard teams say, “We just want a chance to play meaningful games in September?”
We’re in October now, of course, and this is when it really gets good. But I wanted to explain what it’s like to make it through that last month of the regular season as a player — whether or not your team ends up making the postseason.
For organizations that are out of the playoff race, especially, September gives opportunity by way of expanded rosters. Players, front offices and fans get to glimpse what their future holds. However, if you were to survey coaches and players about September baseball, most will say they hate it. Can you name another major sport that changes the rules during the most important time of their season?
There is a laundry list of reasons why September baseball is despised by most, from competitive imbalance to pace of play to personal accolades and incentives.
The Importance Of “Glue Guys”
Ryan Spilborghs is a former big league outfielder. He is currently a color analyst for the Colorado Rockies on Root Sports Rocky Mountain and also works for MLB Network Radio. He came up in the Rockies organization and appeared for the club at the major league level between 2005 and 2011, playing a significant role in Colorado’s 2007 and 2009 post-season runs. Ryan also spent time with the Indians and Rangers organizations in 2012 before finishing out his playing career with Japan’s Seibu Lions in 2013. MLBTR is glad to welcome him as a contributor to its Player’s Perspective series.
The Dodgers are positioned to make a deep playoff run this season. They have been one of the best teams in baseball despite losing the best pitcher on earth in Clayton Kershaw, remarkably going 32-22 since his injury. The front office has found ways to push this team forward by using the waiver wire, trades, and roster manipulation, including using an obscene 14 different starting pitchers.
The Dodgers were even willing to demote the polarizing Yasiel Puig because they felt it made their team better. Puig had put a strain on the clubhouse chemistry. Given that decision, the recent trade of A.J. Ellis to the Phillies for Carlos Ruiz was a strange move. Ellis was the heart and soul of the Dodgers. Carlos Ruiz is a good player who was instrumental for the Phillies in their great run from 2007-2011. Ruiz remains an excellent pitch caller and a great teammate. He can handle a pitching staff, and has better splits versus lefties than Ellis. We can dissect every advanced metric and acknowledge that this trade makes sense. However, I argue that no metric can place a value on what certain players mean to a team.
I expect the Dodgers to continue to play well. But from a player’s point of view, this trade fractures the team. There is now a disconnect between what is best for the team, and what the front office values for the group. In talking with various members of the media, reading the reactions of the Dodgers players (most notably Kershaw), and even if you ask opposing teams, everyone agrees: this trade made no sense.
I have played on two teams that have made the playoffs, the 2007 and 2009 Rockies. The ’07 team made it all the way to the World Series. Talent is always the separating factor. However, when a group of talented individuals play as a collective unit, the cliché “the whole is greater than the sum of the parts” rings true. In order to have the collective whole play as a group, a bit of magic is required. Something must connect them. Most of the time it is a collection of “glue guys” who value the group more than themselves. These “glue guys” don’t have to be superstars, or even starting players. In 2007, Jamey Carroll, Yorvit Torrealba, Josh Fogg, and LaTroy Hawkins were as integral to the team as Matt Holliday and Troy Tulowitzki. The following year, when the Rockies did not bring back Carroll, Hawkins and Fogg, the team and clubhouse were not the same. The front office undervalued their on and off-field production. The 2008 team was the same core of starting players, a team that should have returned to the post season, but it was not the same “core” team. The value of “glue guys” can never be measured but should always be respected.
Baseball has grown enamored with statistics. But baseball is human, it is a grind. Teams spend months with mostly the same individuals sharing a common goal: get through the day. Most times the Major League life is not glamorous or filled with joy. Each day can become monotonous and difficult. Having the rare teammate who can grind with you, who can hold teammates accountable, and who can make people around him better is invaluable. Trading that human element for a better left-handed split makes the Dodgers fragmented and vulnerable. Can a backup catcher really mean that much to a team? The short answer: yes.
Players understand the game is about results and getting wins. A team will not flinch if a great starting pitcher with an ERA over 6 needs to go. Often times, a team will keep a struggling veteran but limit his role to where he can still help a team win. In the case of Ellis, we are discussing the value of a role player and his effect on the overall health of the team. Kershaw and Ellis “wept” when they heard the news. Is that a normal reaction toward a player getting moved?
There are no shirts that say A.J. Ellis was the “heart and soul” of the Dodgers team, but you don’t need one to know that he was. Look at the reactions around baseball. Look at the response of the players in that clubhouse and the media that follows them. Ellis was the last player the Dodgers expected to lose. This story has nothing to do with Carlos Ruiz as a player, and everything to do with how front offices value a team. The Dodgers can easily win the World Series this year, because the talent is there, but it will not change my mind: trading Ellis was a serious mistake. A piece of the Dodgers is sitting in a clubhouse in Philadelphia, and that piece, however small you value it, may be the most important.