(05-11-2018 02:13 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 01:36 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  So what are everyone's thoughts on the future of small market baseball?

Even small market MLB franchises are valuable to the owner because of the national TV revenue stream. I suspect that many of them lose money on an annual basis but that's outweighed by the always-escalating value of the franchise that an owner can cash in on when he sells the team.

The ones that have coerced heavily-subsidized new ballparks out of gullible local politicians have another windfall, on top of the national TV money. They might always be bottom-10 in attendance but they've avoided paying a significant chunk of what should be their own expenses.

None of these franchises are going away, because "contraction" would require buying the team from its owner to disband it, and MLB isn't going to pay any owner $1 billion or more to do that. And no available open market has an MLB-quality ballpark, the cost of building a new ballpark is ridiculous, and the attractive markets that were available before the 1990s (Denver, Phoenix, DC) have been filled. What it would take to move a franchise is either an outrageously high government subsidy (like the $700 million Nevada is giving the Raiders) or an owner who is unbelievably wealthy and willing to pay for a new ballpark himself in a new market (like Stan Kroenke -- so if you find an MLB owner who is worth $20 billion, there's your relocation candidate).

Teams will try to get cities in their own market to compete with each other. The Braves did that to get a new ballpark in the suburbs. The Rangers used interest from Dallas to get themselves a new ballpark in Arlington near the current ballpark. The D-Backs have threatened to move to a new ballpark in Scottsdale or Tempe as part of their ongoing feud with Phoenix.

We wouldn't see contraction, we'd see some teams get demoted to the minor leagues. It'd be a way better idea to be the third team in LA or New York/NJ as opposed to a team in Portland or Austin.

(05-11-2018 02:24 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  We already see it, there's really only 3-5 small market teams and except for arguably Tampa Bay, which is just a bad sports market, most of them have had a team for decades, if not over a century.

Tampa’s been an incredible nhl city for 15 years. Just needs the stadium centrally located.

(05-13-2018 08:22 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Something I do think we are going to see is that teams who want new stadiums are not going to have the same leverage they did 20 yrs ago. Civic leaders will be well aware that most of the marketers that can support baseball already have teams and the relocation threats are relatively empty.

It depends. We won't see many of the original franchises aside from the Ahh's move but it's not impossible to think the Padres, Royals or Brewers could move.

(05-13-2018 05:16 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(05-11-2018 02:24 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  We already see it, there's really only 3-5 small market teams and except for arguably Tampa Bay, which is just a bad sports market, most of them have had a team for decades, if not over a century.

Tampa’s been an incredible nhl city for 15 years. Just needs the stadium centrally located.

It's still a terrible sports area. If that stadium in Ybor City comes about, I think the Rays will have feet planted.

(05-13-2018 04:56 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  It'd be a way better idea to be the third team in LA or New York/NJ as opposed to a team in Portland or Austin.

Yeah, right. Let us know when the Yankees, Mets, Dodgers, and Angels allow that to happen.

Just because they'd fight it tooth and nail doesn't mean that wouldn't be the best idea. Give me a billion dollars and a team and I'd build a ballpark in a beach town near LA or in Northern New Jersey.

Build it in Brooklyn.

Northern NJ gets 4 Stanley Cups with the Devils and a decent BE team and the relative attendance is ok.

There's already an NHL team for the time being.

Evan Longoria thinks the Rays should move. I say they remain but only if they move across the Bay to Ybor City.

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/evan-...tampa-bay/

Arizona Diamondbacks are going to be a "stadium free agent", too. There's no cost to them if they move within the same county, and the cost for leaving Arizona is peanuts so they could easily do that -- if someone wants to build them a ballpark someplace else.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/loc...594820002/

Quote:Under the agreement, if the Diamondbacks found a new location in Maricopa County, the team could leave Chase Field without penalty in 2022, five years earlier than the team's current contract.

Quote:If the Diamondbacks left Arizona after 2022, the team would have to pay penalties of between $5 million and $25 million.

What does that even mean? Where else could they move? Sun Devil Stadium? UOP? Both are football specific. Either they move away from the state or stay where they are.

(05-14-2018 03:40 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  What does that even mean? Where else could they move? Sun Devil Stadium? UOP? Both are football specific. Either they move away from the state or stay where they are.

Their spring training site is on tribal land just outside of Scottsdale. There is speculation the D-Backs would try to build there. But, as with any place else a team might move to, somebody has to come up with several hundred million dollars to build a ballpark.

What’s wrong with Chase Field???

Before baseball expands, they need to solidify markets for the current 30 franchises. If that is not possible, then perhaps contraction to 28. The State of Florida struggles with professional sports attendance in general. I'd only keep one team in Florida but I'm not sure either Miami or Tampa Bay is worth keeping right now. I'd go with the Marlins at the moment. I'd consider a move to North Carolina, Tennessee, Montreal, or Vancouver for a currently unutilized market. Franchises that I could see at least considering moving at some point: A's, Padres, Royals, Brewers, Diamondbacks, Nationals, Rays, and Marlins.

Seriously, they don't even have 30 stable teams. Solve the issues in Florida, Chicago and Oakland before expanding.

(05-15-2018 02:19 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  What’s wrong with Chase Field???

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/loc.../82228788/

Quote:One of the key issues is which side is responsible for roughly $187 million in current and future maintenance obligations through 2027 at Chase Field. That maintenance includes painting the facility, fixing lights, maintaining landscaping, upgrading video surveillance, improving luxury suites, replacing heating and cooling systems, and updating scoreboard panels and display boards, according to county records.

The team contends the county is on the hook for those repairs. The team also argues that because Maricopa County won't do the repairs, the county should let the team modify its lease so the Diamondbacks can "take such actions as it deems necessary in order to move and play Diamondbacks baseball games in a location other than Chase Field."

The resolution of that lawsuit is that the team can leave in 2022 or any time after that, and the county doesn't have to pay for the Chase Field repair work that the team had demanded they pay for.

Apparently a private company looked into taking control of the ballpark from the county and making the renovations, along with building more restaurants, shops, etc., but concluded that the cost might be even higher than the Dbacks' demand and that it would be more profitable to just build a new ballpark.

Are there structural problems at the Phoenix site that make renovation undesirable?

The A's have offered to buy the Oakland Coliseum site from the city and then decide whether they want to renovate or tear down and build new. AFAIK the Dbacks haven't made any offer like that in Phoenix, for whatever reason.

It's so stupid. There's nothing wrong with that ballpark other than that it doesn't appeal enough to the pleasure of the uber rich, along with many of these other demolished or soon to be demolished stadiums less than 25 years old that are being replaced.

I don't see how even after 20 years, the Phoenix Downtown Ballpark (screw its current ever changing name) is not one of the best overall stadiums in the world and one of the best in MLB. It's about as good if not better than any ballpark opened around that time, certainly the Trop or whatever it's called these days, and definitely more so than Dodger, Oakland-Alameda, Wrigley and Fenway aside from the historical angle.

(05-15-2018 07:16 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  It's so stupid. There's nothing wrong with that ballpark other than that it doesn't appeal enough to the pleasure of the uber rich, along with many of these other demolished or soon to be demolished stadiums less than 25 years old that are being replaced.

I don't see how even after 20 years, the Phoenix Downtown Ballpark (screw its current ever changing name) is not one of the best overall stadiums in the world and one of the best in MLB. It's about as good if not better than any ballpark opened around that time, certainly the Trop or whatever it's called these days, and definitely more so than Dodger, Oakland-Alameda, Wrigley and Fenway aside from the historical angle.

They just want to see if any other area municipalities will pick up the tab for new stadium construction. As mentioned before, there are very few out of state locations that can support baseball. The play now is pitting the Local governments within the current MSA against one another.

It's not as bad as it used to be. But at least stadiums are financed by outsiders via car rental and hotel taxes as opposed to on the backs of local taxpayers...which still doesn't change the fact it's still a more or less brand new stadium. They're worse than Pharaoh Bender and his oversized monument which he almost immediately wanted torn down.