Talk:Minor league baseball

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Baseball (Rated B-Class, High-importance)
Mitlogo.svg Minor league baseball is within the scope of WikiProject Baseball, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of baseball and baseball-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Table help

Can somebody help me with this table? I have some extraneous entries between the table title and the beginning of the table, and I can't figure out where they're coming from. I'm not very good at this table thing.  :-( -- Zoe

Found 'em. A few of the <tr> tags were missing the <. I find it's easier to track down the problem bits if you do a "view source" on the page from your browser; the broken tags will appear in sequence there, and with at least some browsers (ex, Mozilla) there'll appear highlighted in a different color from the working tags, so they're easier to spot. --Brion VIBBER

[edit] Separated the list

Since this page grew too big, I separated the list of teams into a separate article. WhisperToMe 02:47, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I apologize if I edit someone else's comments. It really isn't clear to me how someone should simply add a comment here.

Regarding the very end of the article, what is the basis for the comparison of the Florida/Albuquerque attendance? It looks to me like Florida outdrew Albuquerque by more than 2 to 1 on the season.

[edit] Independent minor league baseball

There is a gaping hole in this article regarding independent leagues. Iceberg3k 14:22, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bull Durham

I think the effect the movie Bull Durham had on minor league baseball should be mentioned. From the movie's wikipedia article: "Most of all, Bull Durham revived interest in minor league baseball, which had been stagnating in small-town areas for decades, to where minor league teams achieve decent attendance and are even subject to relocation/bidding wars between communities." Wangster 05:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Another reference from here [1] "Then there was the Hollywood factor. When baseball's longtime unofficial rival began making baseball films, seats began to fill more rapidly at the ball park. Hollywood produced a flood of successful baseball movies that caught itself up in the game's rising popularity. The most direct hit from the minor league perspective was Bull Durham (1988), written and directed by former minor leaguer Ron Shelton. Instantly, the demand for Durham Bulls souvenirs shot upward on a national scale, and other minor league front offices noticed a significant coattail effect for their merchandise." Wangster 05:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minor League vs. minor league?

This article distinguishes minor league baseball from Minor League Baseball; It seems like most of the content of this article, other than independant leagues should fall under the Minor League article, though I could be wrong...? I found it confusing to determine what actually fell under Minor League Baseball vs. independant... TheHYPO 07:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the articles should remain seperate. "minor league baseball" is about minor league baseball as a group of leagues playing in below the major leagues -- a concept. "Minor League Baseball" is about an organization, officially and legally titled as such, which operates minor league baseball in the U.S. --CPAScott 13:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree with nonmerger per CPAScott. Kinston eagle 12:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I also agree with a nonmerger of the articles. The distinction that CPAScott identifies is significant and important. Independent leagues that are not part of "Minor League Baseball" should be under "minor league baseball" and can't rightly be put in with "Minor League Baseball". 12:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I definitely support a nonmerger. Nick22aku 20:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I would also like to see more of a history on minor league baseball. I can't even conceive of the amount of effort it might take, but I recall older relatives talking about local B,C, and D teams that played in practically every small city before TV. Some were "affiliates" of major league teams, but would get 20-30 used gloves, etc. for their work. Autkm (talk) 06:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I support nonmerger for the reasons cited by CPAScott dashiellx (talk) 10:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Failed

This article failed the GA noms due to lack of references. Tarret 00:56, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Professionalism in minor leagues

Are the minor leagues really professional? I thought that it was amateur just because of its position below the major leagues. Scott Gall 04:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


Yes indeed, they are professional; all players are under contract and receive pay. Of course, at the lowest levels, the pay isn't much.Wschart 16:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hyphenation?

I did not want to storm in and make changes, but it seems to me that except in the formal name of the organization "Minor League Baseball" (where the form is up to the owner of the name) "minor-league" as a compound adjective ought always to be hyphenated: "minor-league baseball", including in the title of the article. Would anyone have problems with that? Owlcroft 22:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Class vs. Term?

Typically Double A and Triple A are not called Class AA or Class AAA but Single A is called Class A or Class A Advanced

The terms (Triple-A vs AAA) are interchangeable. And there are three single-A levels - high-A, low-A, and short-season A. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the are four. The rookie leagues, even though they play a "short" season that starts June 19, are not considered the same level as the short-season A leagues - but they ARE considered to be a level within Class A. In fact, one of the two rookie leagues is considered higher than the other - as someone says elsewhere on this page - so if we differentiate High-A and Low-A we probably have to differentiate Rookie and Rookie-Advanced and say there are five divisions of Class A.

This was all actually a lot simpler when there were truly separate levels below AA, all the way down to D. I suppose it came out of the same mentality that makes building management call basements "the ground floor." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick M. Sullivan (talkcontribs) 18:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Patrick M. Sullivan (talk) 18:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Merger Question

By all means merge this article with Minor League Baseball. Kenallen 02:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Seems a bit silly to have two such similarly themed articles! Merge 'em! MeegsC | Talk 08:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Why is there even discussion? Merge these now. Brandonrush 23:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Would an expert on this topic please merge. phish_bulb 18:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Merge! This confuses as is. One article can explain the various levels, organizations and types of baseball in the minors. Goeverywhere 04:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

A prior poster has a better solution, this article should properly be named minor-league baseball and should not be merged with an article that is about one specific entity, namely the association of farm clubs run by Major League baseball known as Minor League Baseball. Awotter 20:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Merge. The separation presupposes that the reader already knows the distinction, and is quite confusing for the layman. Jd2718 12:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree that as it currently is set up, it is very confusing to someone who would not expect minor league baseball to refer to two different (but not wholly separate entities). I would vote against merging as they are separate and a combined article could be as confusing as the current situation. Two articles written probably by a single person on both subjects referring to the other but emphasizing the differences would probably be best. Autkm (talk) 06:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. In my opinion, these two should DEFINITELY be merged. But how does one go about doing this? --Mm40 (talk) 01:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, for one thing one waits for a consensus to develop. Also, one gives reasons for one's opinions. I most emphatically disagree that these articles should be merged. One article, the proper noun, refers to a specific organization of leagues with ties to major league teams. The common-noun title is the generic name for all minor leagues, including many that are not affiliated with the majors; where would discussion of these leagues go? The two articles discuss different subjects, and merger would only further confuse the issue. The confusion arises from the organization appropriating the common noun for use as its proper name. Merger would be akin to merging Window (computing) with Microsoft Windows.

That being said, although much of the history is relevant to both the organization and minors in general, it should be edited with at least some degree of emphasis on the development of teams not affiliated with the majors. And the discussion of levels is a discussion of Minor League Baseball the organization, not minor league baseball the type of league, and should be removed from this article and placed in Minor League Baseball.

Much of the content of this page pertains only to the Minor League Baseball organization. That does not mean, however, that there is no need for an article on minor league baseball, the levels of professional baseball that are below the major leagues in quality of play.

I am interested in hearing other viewpoints, but one or two word assertions do not make an argument. This is, after all, a discussion page. Please, why should they be merged?Illexsquid (talk) 19:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

So, this has been discussed for nearly 9 months with no conclusion? Makes you wonder what the level of interest is. The dilemma is that the National Association renamed itself Minor League Baseball, while teams in the Northern League, for example, are clearly minor leagues but without the NA affiliation. However, there's not enough info to really justify a separate article about "Minor League Baseball", as I see it. One approach would be to use the Baseball America Directory approach and treat them all as nearly-alike, with a nod to MiLB as being obviously a much larger organization than the independents. But at the very least, there needs to be disambiguation. The upper vs. lower case is confusing. MiLB could be renamed as MiLB (organization). Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Strongly in favor of this approach. Minor League Baseball (the corporate entity) is an established organization and needs to be referred to as such (either as "MiLB" or "Minor League Baseball", it doesn't really matter), but it's also important to have an article referring to minor league baseball (the idea). Perhaps call the generic article "Minor league professional baseball" instead? That at least provides both the necessary context and allows for a discussion of all the minor leagues, be they affiliated with MiLB or not. Obviously, there would then be a variety of articles providing more context on various aspects or divisions of the minor league system. Duncan1800 (talk) 04:35, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
"Minor league professional baseball" is not a term anyone would think to look for. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

My main objection to a merge is simply that not all minor league baseball teams are part of Minor League Baseball. The independent leagues {such as the Northern League) are not part of Minor League Baseball. They are separate entities altogether. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 11:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the majority view that it is appropriate to have separate articles for "minor league baseball," the concept, and "Minor League Baseball," the organization which includes many but not all minor leagues. However, much of the information now presented in THIS article is specifically about affiliated leagues and the mechanics of farm systems. I think this specific information--anything which does NOT apply to the independent minors--should be moved over. Spark240 (talk) 02:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It might surprise some of you to learn that the term "National Association" is still very much alive. Baseball America Directory as well as the MiLB site itself [2] still use the NA term in the present tense. It's as if the NA is the organization and MiLB is the "brand". Whether that helps or hinders the decision on this point remains to be seen. However, the obvious thing to do would be to rename the capitalized MiLB to MiLB Organization, and link it within the generic Milb article along with links to the non-affiliated minor leagues.
In short, Do Not Merge. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 11:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2 Class As?

I don't know, but am confused: Can 'Class A' refer to two different classifications? Is this a mistake? I don't know how the minor leagues are arranged, but if there are two Class-A classifications, that should be made clear for laymen like me. Right now it looks like a mistake. Thmazing (talk) 19:29, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

"Class A" in this case refers both to the collective grouping of Class A Advanced/Class A/Short Season Class A, as well as one of the groups within the broader category. Perhaps the higher-level header should be renamed to "Single-A". Thoughts, anyone? -Dewelar (talk) 19:40, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
No one else is commenting, but as someone who doesn't know before reading the article and would like to understand things after reading the article, that sounds like it might help. Thmazing (talk) 21:23, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
I just did a little rewording which, hopefully, will make it clear that "Class A" describes three distinct levels. "Single-A" doesn't seem to be an official term used by MiLB. -NatureBoyMD (talk) 00:12, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I think that edit helps a lot. It's much clearer to me now. Well done.
Can we find a citation for the they-usually-are-there-to-work-on-pitching-or-batting claim?Thmazing (talk) 16:21, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The lower-level classifications used to be A, B, C, D. When they reorganized things in the early 1960s, they decided to call everything A or AA or AAA so that nobody would feel "second class" (B,C,D). But that muddied the waters, as there are still different classifications within. Currently you have Triple-A, Double-A, High Class A, Low Class A, Short-Season, Rookie Advanced, and Rookie. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merged?

Although a merger doesn't seem to have been approved on this talk page, the pages Minor League Baseball -- which refers to the association of leagues with teams affiliated with major league clubs (a legal organization) -- and Minor league baseball -- which refers to the concept, were merged. As it stands, all of minor league baseball is being represented by the Minor League Baseball organization logo, which is blatantly misleading. Minor leagues such as the Northern_League_(baseball), the Canadian-American_Association_of_Professional_Baseball, the Golden_Baseball_League, and the Atlantic_League_of_Professional_Baseball, possibly among others, are *not* members of the Minor League Baseball association, and classifying them as such is simply wrong. This isn't nitpicking -- it's an important distinction.

I propose that the old Minor League Baseball article be re-instated, that this article be renamed "Minor league professional baseball", and that the page "Minor league baseball" disambiguate to both articles with an explanation similar to the above. 24.115.58.35 (talk) 08:28, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Completely agreed. The current set-up is just incorrect; between the logo from the MiLB organization being the main illustration, and the fact that there is a rather large section of the article devoted purely to the MiLB, there is potentially more confusion than the previous seperate articles. I think a split back to two seperate pages paired with a disambiguation page would be the perfect solution. 98.198.7.30 (talk) 20:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] move Mexican League from AAA list?

Shouldn't the Mexican League be moved from the AAA list? Since they are not affiliated with major league teams, doesn't the Mexican League belong with the independent teams list? Thoughts, anyone? Elsquared (talk) 22:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Although the clubs are unaffiliated, the Mexican League is apparently part of the National Association and is considered to be AAA level. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Note the inclusion of the Mexican League standings, for example, on MiLB.com. [3] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Classification Sections

I have been monitoring the lists of franchise cities in the sections regarding each minor league classification. These lists, particularly in sections regarding upper-level classifications, have become compilations of more than a dozen cities as users add their own cities to the list. In my opinion, these lists of cities are meant to provide a general picture of city demographics of each level. Instead, they have become an advertising board for residents of minor league baseball cities to promote their home city. In my opinion, the inclusion of this large amount of cities is unnecessary and irrelevant to the article.

My suggestion is for the lists to be limited to 1-2 cities for each league included in a particular classification. This should adequately provide readers with a general picture of each classification's city demographics. As it will most likely be problematic to decide which cities are included, perhaps the city of the league's current defending champion and runner-up can be used to avoid argument. For example the Triple-A section would include the metropolitan area of Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania (IL defending champs Scranton/Wilkes-Barre Yankees) and Durham, North Carolina (IL defending runner-up Durham Bulls) to represent the International League. The AAA section would also include Sacramento, California (PCL defending champs Sacramento RiverCats) and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (PCL defending runner-ups Oklahoma City Redhawks) to represent the Pacific Coast League.

Please sound in with your thoughts on alternative ideas or if you do not view this issue as a major problem.

-Kithira (talk) 21:06, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm aware of this problem too. Something needs to be done about it. I like your idea about winners/runners-up. City population may be another factor to consider.-NatureBoyMD (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
If two cities per league seems to be a good number, then perhaps the defending champion and the city with the highest population would be the best solution. If the championship city was also the most populous, then the second most populous city could be used.-Kithira (talk) 23:59, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
That sounds like a good idea. -NatureBoyMD (talk) 03:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Alright then I'll implement that solution barring any objections on this thread. -Kithira (talk) 12:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Update- Have decided to utilize champion and highest average attendance (2nd if also champion) cities due to ambiguity between different sources of population. Will implement at end of 2009 seasons barring objections.Kithira (talk) 21:57, 13 August 2009 (UTC)