Non-Phillies 2023 Major League Season Discussion

[andyb]

I miss that long ago era when position players actually tried to pitch when they entered the game. I know Jose Canseco messed it up for everyone, but don't half of us think that Kody Clemens would probably throw upper 80s with a pretty good 3 or 4 pitch mix if he wanted to? Not saying he would be better than Dylan Covey....

Let’s Evaluate Brandon Crawford’s Pitching Debut

[bkox]

I dont have an athletic sub... is this something that will affect the Phillies?

MLB intends to curb team spending on tech

[bkox]

Mets reliever Drew Smith ejected from Subway Series game vs Yankees for illegal...

[BaseballCat]

Not sure of the implications of this, even after reading the Athletic. This link is free. Maybe others have thoughts.

MLB Considering Limitations On Teams' Off-Field Spending

[andyb]

That is an interesting question. I was against the minor league cutbacks that were really designed to save money as opposed to a better product. In general I am opposed to cutting back front office expenses arbitrarily. That means jobs go away and major league teams could also use that to save money.

But that does not mean a front office arms race is all good. If Tampa or Oakland spends an extra $10 million on analytics to compete then the Yankees and Dodgers will match that. And then the players don't get that money. I guess in a labor sense a dollar spent on 10 analytics employees is better than a dollar spent on one player so it really does not matter unless small revenue teams are not spending their revenue sharing.

The bad in this is that too much analytics has made the game worse to watch. 3 outcome baseball is a direct result of this. All the pitching stuff designed to blow out and then replace young arms throwing 98 mph is a part of this. Are excessive analytics helping? In general I don't trust MLB on anything like this because they just want to make money, but it is a bit more complicated than that.

[BostonRoss]

I have to come out in favor of not cutting back on non-player expenses. The slim chance I have of achieving my childhood dream of being in MLB is sadly limited to non-playing opportunities…

[bkox]

‘Moneyball Act' introduced to protect cities losing MLB teams

[BostonRoss]

Maybe the bill’s sponsors think Philadelphia should have been compensated for losing the A’s in the first place. Not to mention two other California teams that owe New York. But why stop at baseball? We want compensation for the Warriors! California teams also owe compensation to Cleveland, Minneapolis, Buffalo, Kansas City/Omaha, and St. Louis (though the latter is complicated…).

[Philsmania]

Oaklanders put on a good show with the reverse boycott but it looks like the move to Las Vegas is becoming a done deal with approvals by the NV legislature.

[bkox]

Bryce Harper, Bryson Stott not excited about prospect of A's moving to Las Vegas

[Philsmania]

I'm of two minds about the whole Athletics to Vegas thing. Both sides of the pro and con are right, to be honest.

The pro-move argument is right since Oakland is not arguably not a Major League city anymore being a poor city with a declining population (45th largest in the country, only the 7th largest in California), the Bay Area arguably isn't big enough to be a two-team market (smaller than Dallas-Ft. Worth and Houston areas, Atlanta gaining on it, not much bigger than DC Metro (and that's sans Baltimore) and the Delaware Valley and even Miami/SE Florida are not too far behind) and the Athletics' attendance--even with good teams--hasn't been good for years (one season of 2 million plus since 2005).

The anti-move argument is right, too, however, since the poor attendance is very much a self-fulfilling prophecy as management--with MLB's blessing--has done everything to turn off the fanbase by stripping the team AND drastically raising ticket prices at the same time and the franchise really played games with the Oakland. Most of the hurdles to the Howard Terminal plan were overcome but then they made the "binding agreement" to buy land in Las Vegas which wasn't binding and which was obviously a ploy to either go someplace which would give them the public financing at their desired amount or to extract additional public financing concessions from Oakland (Oakland told them to pound sand). And, a MLB park which only seats 30k is a joke.

[andyb]

Oakland may be somewhat poor, but no more than a place like Detroit. Alameda County where Oakland is has 1.6 million people with a median household income of $112,000. It is rich, not poor. The whole reason why the Bay Area deserves 2 teams potentially is that it is both large AND wealthy. San Francisco and San Jose on average may be wealthier, but the Oakland are is plenty wealthy on its own. For comparison Philadelphia has almost the same population in the core county (1.57 million) but has half the median income ($53,000).

This is about public financing of a stadium and not at all about the market.

[zambonir]

If you start to argue about whether a place isn't a major league city anymore you may as well contract the Reds.

[Philsmania]

This is about public financing of a stadium and not at all about the market.

I would agree. Las Vegas has a much, much smaller TV market and no RSV in place. It would not surprise me if in 15-20 years we hear whispers about the Athletics looking for home #5.

[zambonir]

no RSV in place

I think there's a vaccine for that now.

[Callison]

A's - rants aplenty - I'm writing here because I want all the usual suspects to read this stuff. If this needs to be moved, fine, but it needs to be said somewhere, IMHO.

People out west know the story of the A's, but it's AMAZING how little others know about it. In particular, I was deeply offended by the Phils' announcer who thinks the A's move to Vegas is just fine. It isn't fine by any stretch of the imagination. Oakland is getting... mugged. The owner, Fisher, has treated the franchise like a security. He has traded away all the talent to keep salaries low, and the team's performance is a measurement of his total neglect. He hasn't lifted a finger to compete. If you've seen "Major League", that's about the story with the A's, except the evil owner is about to win.

Here's a brief review of how Fisher came to own the A's: https://www.sfchronicle.com/sports/ostler/article/bud-selig-bungled-a-s-sale-17858602.php

Here's hoping the Phils announcers get a read. They have no idea who Fisher is.

The Commissioner of Baseball is one of consummate trust. He's supposed to do the very best for baseball that he can. FOR BASEBALL. Instead, he seems to have guided the sale to his friend and then to Fisher, who destroyed the franchise with impunity.

I can not understand why MLB is behind Fisher and Vegas. Rewarding an owner for ruining the franchise, moving a franchise from a city with all its urban problems to a city of vacationers and their rich hosts...

AND column after column has been written about this... mugging, but NOBODY IS LISTENING.

But if the effort to throw Selig out of the HOF could somehow get started, everybody will listen maybe the franchise can be sold to an owner who cares and Oakland can somehow keep the A's.

Here's the kind of person Fisher is. He's in the middle of negotiating a HUGE redevelopment deal including a stadium on the water, a la San Francisco. Oakland is doing everything they can to meet Fishers demands. There are vast fortunes to be made. During the negotiations, Fisher's team reportedly told Oakland, you know that requirement to build the affordable housing - well, we want that out of the deal. Trouble is 1. it's a state law and 2. every developer in CA has been following it for some 10 years. Just trying to extend the disagreement any way he can.

[BostonRoss]

The population of the city of Oakland is irrelevant. It was never one of the U.S.'s largest cities, even when the A's first moved there. It's still larger than eight other cities that house major league teams.

But even looking at the metro area population, it's hard to justify the Bay Area having two teams. The region never supported both teams at the same time. This isn't the first time Oakland has been rumored to move, and the Giants were rumored to move a couple of times themselves when they played in Candlestick. As others have said, the metro area population is not only much smaller than the other two-team regions (and you could argue that Chicago has trouble supporting both teams there), even if you include the San Jose area it's smaller than the two in Texas and about the same as several others, including Philadelphia.

The facility they play in is one of the worst in the league, and that matters (look at Tampa Bay, who has been good for most of the last 15 years). No doubt the owner is shooting his way out of town, but it's not surprising he won't/can't build a stadium equivalent to AT&T Park. It's much easier to find another place willing to build it for him. MLB owners are mainly concerned with one thing; Fisher happens to be the one in the worst situation. They aren't the most civic minded group.

And of course, MLB is happy to gain a new market without losing another. Manfred does what those "civic" minded owners want. Cities have been abandoned all the time--Montreal, Washington, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Seattle...

[andyb]

If you look at combined statistical areas (adds adjoining MSAs like San Francisco and San Jose together) the Bay Area is 5th just slightly behind Chicago. It is very close in size to both DC and Chicago. It is wealthy too like DC.

There are enough people and there is enough money in the market for 2 teams. Remember teams today are about filling the luxury boxes and then selling the sport on TV. Las Vegas is about one quarter the size of a market. It has some wealth too obviously, but baseball is probably better off with a second team in the Bay Area.

Combined statistical area

[schillingfan]

Go further back to owner Charlie Finley who decimated that dominant team of the 1970sThat team made me a baseball fan. Reggie Jackson should have been an Athletic for life.

[BostonRoss]

I used MSA population (SF/Oakland plus San Jose) instead of CMSA population. Neither is quite right in this context as the geographic fanbase is determined by myriad factors including the locations of other teams, historic ties among areas, migration from urban areas, team history, etc. Portland, Oregon is a very large urban area (much larger than many current major league markets) that doesn't seem particularly ripe for a major league team.

I don't see regional wealth, which is equally hard to quantify (and also requires some geographic delineation), as highly correlated with attendance or fan enthusiasm. I don't consider St. Louis affluent.

I don't see any reason why the Bay Area deserves two teams any more than other large metro areas (beyond New York and LA). I think that other areas currently without teams might be better than Las Vegas for a single team, though.