I’m a fan of the WBC too, I love the passion and the growth of the game. Obviously, I agree that logistically there appears to be no other time to have it, even with the limitations that arise from it taking place during spring training.
One aspect I hate (which is also maybe an inherent limitation in the timeframe) is the one-and-done thing. It’s cliché, but baseball is a game of averages and the DNA of the game sort of demands a series to truly determine a better team—superior pitching staff as a whole, batters getting 25 ABs rather than just 4 or 5, etc. I generally dislike play-in wild card games for the same reason. Football (our version or everyone else’s) lends itself better to a winner-take-all game. Hockey, which is more like baseball I think, used to run a World Cup type tournament. The best version, in my opinion, involved at least a short series to crown a champ. When you’re talking international bragging rights that last 4 years, it feels wrong that the title could rest on something fluky, like a random error or a pitcher having a bad day. Yeah, it can be thrilling, but especially if your team is on the wrong end, it can also feel like you got cheated.
I’m curious what your ideas would be if you could design your perfect version of this thing. What, if anything, would you change within the framework that we have to work with?
Tough question. The only way to avoid that small sample size issue is to turn knockout rounds into best of 3 series, which would make the tournament last more than a month which obviously will never happen. There’s no ideal option that also logistically feasible. I think the current format is the best they can do.
I’m a fan of the WBC too, I love the passion and the growth of the game. Obviously, I agree that logistically there appears to be no other time to have it, even with the limitations that arise from it taking place during spring training.
One aspect I hate (which is also maybe an inherent limitation in the timeframe) is the one-and-done thing. It’s cliché, but baseball is a game of averages and the DNA of the game sort of demands a series to truly determine a better team—superior pitching staff as a whole, batters getting 25 ABs rather than just 4 or 5, etc. I generally dislike play-in wild card games for the same reason. Football (our version or everyone else’s) lends itself better to a winner-take-all game. Hockey, which is more like baseball I think, used to run a World Cup type tournament. The best version, in my opinion, involved at least a short series to crown a champ. When you’re talking international bragging rights that last 4 years, it feels wrong that the title could rest on something fluky, like a random error or a pitcher having a bad day. Yeah, it can be thrilling, but especially if your team is on the wrong end, it can also feel like you got cheated.
I’m curious what your ideas would be if you could design your perfect version of this thing. What, if anything, would you change within the framework that we have to work with?
Tough question. The only way to avoid that small sample size issue is to turn knockout rounds into best of 3 series, which would make the tournament last more than a month which obviously will never happen. There’s no ideal option that also logistically feasible. I think the current format is the best they can do.
Fair enough.