Are we seeing a level of parity in MLB?

For the first time in about a year I feel compelled to answer a question.

Right now we are seeing the smaller market teams with their improved scouting reaping the benefits of a few years of getting things right at the right time. This is a new way of Baseball where every few years the smaller teams will rise up with good young talent and a few veterans that are having resurgent years. I think that money in the end will rule the day long term, so far as the Yankees and Red Sox will not stay bad teams for ten years like the Pirates but we are seeing some small market teams flare up and keep up with the big guys for a period of a few years. I think you will always see the big spenders near the top over the long haul but the small market teams will rotate their success...this years Nationals are the Reds of two years ago. It does seem like teams like Tampa have been better at eliminating the decline by making the right trade at the right time instead of beign farm teams for the Yankees and the Red Sox like the Royals and Pirates have been for the past fifteen years.

Eh.....I tend to disagree with this argument.

With the success of the Tampa Bay Rays in 2008, they really set a standard for how to build a contender in a small market. That process revolves largely around scouting. Because of that, there is a lot that could go wrong. In the case of the Rays, everything worked out. But because prospects are never guaranteed to work out, it can fail. The Pirates, Royals, Orioles, and a couple of other teams are using this method in order to compete with other teams.

However, because of the hit-and-miss nature of this method and the time it takes, I still believe that money gives teams a huge advantage. For example, in order for a team to build success like the Rays, it takes a few years of losing while waiting for the prospects to come and fill in. Meanwhile, if a team like the Yankees or Phillies have the money, they can go out and sign elite players who leave their small markets like Cliff Lee and CC Sabathia (yeah, I know Lee was traded from the Indians, but they weren't gonna be able to keep him). Once the stars get good in their small markets, many of them leave for the larger markets.

When it comes to the money in baseball, it really does give teams an advantage. It doesn't mean championships, but it helps. Once the playoffs come around, anything can happen. But look at the AL East.....the Yankees and Red Sox always are near the top of the division and they spend money like crazy. The Rays came and ruined that with their huge rebuilding process, but no one can deny that money certainly helped the Yankees and Red Sox remain competitive. The Angels in the AL West owned their division until just a couple years ago when the Rangers rose to the top. Not coincidentally, they were a large market.

Teams like the Cubs, however, have a large market but don't have success. While more money does not mean more championships, it gives teams an advantage, thus increasing there chances of winning.

Money matters.

the thing is small market teams tend to falter near the end. ask baltimore, they cop out usually by the all-star break. and big teams KNOW how to win! as a Yankees fan we actually expect to battle with Boston for the division come September each and everytime. we dont expect to see Toronto or Baltimore. the Rays were knocking on the door in 2007 and mopped the floor with the Yanks and RedSox that year.

by July i expect to see the "usual suspects" NYY,Bos,Tex and TB, Det and the Angels all competing

*after 1978 (Reggie Jackson) the Yanks didnt win until Derek Jeter (in 1996) hit the league. they had a long dought that was filled up by home grown prospects (Bernie Williams, Jorge Posada, Mariano Rivera, Andy Petitte and Jeter)

Yes, teams are finally putting more into developing their own players and finding good coaches rather than just overpaying on free agents.