Stadium/Arena Saga Omnibus

[BBTV]

29 minutes ago, SFGiants58 said:

 

I’ve always figured that Montréal was the most trouble-free relocation in the same way DC was for the MK I Expos (no realignment, decent temporary stadium, etc.). 

 

My guess is there would be some reel line mint, if not at first, but eventually.  I think I said this before, but it's killing multiple birds with one stone:

1) Marlins to AL East, where their attendance woud get a boost from Red Sox and Yankees games, and 

2) MTL to NL East, where they'd get their old rivals back, and get a boost (if needed, and presumably) from road-tripping NY and Phila fans.  They'd also be more competitive in this scenario.

 

I think all parties involved would jump at this scenario.

[Gothamite]

4 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Did the Expos really ever compete for good free agents?  Is it fair to ask whether they'd be at a disadvantage for recruiting any star African American players without dramatically overpaying?  I don't think Latin American players would be an issue - in fact some might prefer it, at least for the next 1-5 years, and I don't think most white American-born players would have any issue, as it's a great place despite presenting some extra challenges for their families that might move with them, but would AA players really go for it considering they'd be putting themselves in situations where they're more of a minority than they are anywhere in the states, and from things that I've read (not witnessed personally) it's not known for embracing racial diversity?  Is it fair to ask that, and is it a fair concern?

 

It might be a moot point, since the results of a google search for black MLB players shocked me when I saw how few there were, but the ability to draw FA's in a non-capped sport is usually one of the first things on my mind once the other hurdles (basic start-up) prove to be workable (which, so far, they haven't in MTL's case.)  In capped sports, it doesn't matter as much, since there's limited money to go around and any player will follow the money anywhere, but baseball is different.

 

Funny you should mention that, since the first Expo that comes to mind is usually Vladimir. 

 

 

I don’t think there’s a whole lot of concern about attracting African-American free agents to Montreal.  The Braves are now in the heart of White Atlanta, but I haven’t heard they’re having that problem.  Similarly, the PNW is pretty white, has a very troubled racial history, and Seattle seems to do fine.  I’m also reminded of the Green Bay Packers, who definitely had a hard time luring black players to town until Reggie White made his statement by signing.

 

Ultimately, I think playing for a competitor is the deciding factor.  With money being a close second.  If the nouveau-Spos can offer either or both of those, they’ll be fine in the free-agent market.  

[Gothamite]

8 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Maybe 8 years time... unless that buyout shrinks a bit every year.  In the video that you posted it was said that part of breaking the lease early would be that they'd have to fund the demo, in addition to any financial buyouts.  What is not known, is if it's a compulsory lease (I forget the legal term) that requires them to operate there, regardless of if they just pay the lease off and attempt to operate elsewhere, like most leases are.

 

My understanding is that the buyout does go down every year.  Not to downplay even that amount, but at some point it’s better to spend a big chunk of cash to get out of an unsustainable market.  And the Rays are now admitting that Tampa Bay is an unsustainable market, after many years of publicly insisting otherwise.

 

As for the compulsory lease, that’s just one more hurdle.  There are reports that the Chicago Fire have secured a release from their suburban stadium, which was the most airtight I’ve ever heard of.  Not only were the Fire contractually obligated to play there, but if MLS ever announced a second Chicago club that team would also be contractually obligated to play there.

 

There is no contract that can’t be broken.  The only question is how much it’ll cost.  At some point St. Pete will accept a deal and the Rays will write a check. 

[SFGiants58]

6 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

I’m also reminded of the Green Bay Packers, who definitely had a hard time luring black players to town until Reggie White made his statement by signing.

 

Milwaukee proper, on the other hand, will be a bit of a fight. The Milwaukee PD’s ineptitude when it comes to race (and sexuality, see Konerak Sinthasomphone) is legendary. Publicized incidents of the MPD harassing Bucks players will not go unnoticed, no matter how competitive the Bucks or Brewers are. 

 

6 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

Ultimately, I think playing for a competitor is the deciding factor.  With money being a close second.  If the nouveau-Spos can offer either or both of those, they’ll be fine in the free-agent market.  

 

I would agree with this assessment, to an extent. With waves of immigration into the city, being black would be less of a problem. Language laws may be annoying, but there are workarounds. 

[BBTV]

50 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Funny you should mention that, since the first Expo that comes to mind is usually Vladimir. 

 

 

I don’t think there’s a whole lot of concern about attracting African-American free agents to Montreal.  The Braves are now in the heart of White Atlanta, but I haven’t heard they’re having that problem.  Similarly, the PNW is pretty white, has a very troubled racial history, and Seattle seems to do fine.  I’m also reminded of the Green Bay Packers, who definitely had a hard time luring black players to town until Reggie White made his statement by signing.

 

Ultimately, I think playing for a competitor is the deciding factor.  With money being a close second.  If the nouveau-Spos can offer either or both of those, they’ll be fine in the free-agent market.  

 

Vlad was neither a FA nor an African American, but rather a Dominican.  I only draw the distinction because being an immigrant or playing on a visa in the states vs going to Canada is like Gala to Fuji if the alternative is staying in DR and living in poverty, while for a "native" African American, LA or NY vs MTL might be like Gala to Naval.  Not just because of race, because that could be a factor anywhere (though we don't see flocks of great AA players going to any of those places you mentioned in non-capped sports... specifically the PNW, MIN, MIL, etc.) but I've just observed that (and maybe it's just recently with the Kawhi Leonard thing that's sticking in my brain) going to Canada seems equivalent to going to Mars for some people, and if TOR is Mars, then MTL might as well be Jupiter.  Again, I'm putting words and feelings into people that may not even have them, just having the discussion - but there might not even be a discussion to be had.

 

At the end of the day, I'd rank money over winning, rather than how you had it.  There's definitely been some recent cases of guys taking a little less to play somewhere they wanted to be vs somewhere else, but it's usually not a ton less, and it's usually to a place with an equal chance of winning (Cliff Lee to the Phillies in '11 after turning down more from NYY is an example), but nobody is signing with a hot TB Rays team for less than a struggling Mets team would pay them.

[rmc523]

On 6/28/2019 at 6:34 PM, Marlins93 said:

It is starting to seem like the bizarre Montreal-St. Pete split proposal isn't a ploy to gain leverage for public financing of a new ballpark in the Tampa area, but rather to generate buzz and build momentum for a relocation to Montreal. Why else would Sternberg publicly question the viability of the Tampa market for baseball? How can you walk back on that and expect a deal to be made?

 

The Marlins were publicly exploring relocation circa 2005-2006 when ballpark financing reached a standstill, but I don't recall them throwing the market under the bus. If anything, they were denouncing the local and state governments for not being supportive enough.

 

I agree with this.

 

On 6/28/2019 at 6:40 PM, Gothamite said:

 

Being in the AL East, they play an outsized number of games against the Yankees and Red Sox, the two most popular teams in Tampa Bay.  I’ve often wondered how those games skew the Rays’ TV ratings. 

 

That is an interesting thing I didn't think about.

 

On 6/30/2019 at 10:12 AM, BringBackTheVet said:

 

My guess is there would be some reel line mint, if not at first, but eventually.  I think I said this before, but it's killing multiple birds with one stone:

1) Marlins to AL East, where their attendance woud get a boost from Red Sox and Yankees games, and 

2) MTL to NL East, where they'd get their old rivals back, and get a boost (if needed, and presumably) from road-tripping NY and Phila fans.  They'd also be more competitive in this scenario.

 

I think all parties involved would jump at this scenario.

 

The Marlins may get a slight attendance boost, but then they'd suffer record wise from playing those teams as well, meaning they'd be less competitive, which would affect attendance.

[Wings]

If the Rays do relocate to Montreal, MLB would most likely leave them in the AL East to rival Toronto. 

[Around the Horn]

12 hours ago, Wings said:

If the Rays do relocate to Montreal, MLB would most likely leave them in the AL East to rival Toronto. 

MLB is probably salivating at the idea of 18 games a season of Toronto-Montreal...

 

It would probably never touch the intensity of Maple Leafs-Canadians but hey

[Quillz]

On 6/24/2019 at 1:31 PM, Waffles said:

I should clarify that I also think records should also reside with the team's lineage, and not the franchise's

I agree with this in that history always belongs to the franchise/club/team and NOT the city. This is why I have a big problem with agreements where Oklahoma City can claim they won the 1979 championship, but cannot claim the Sonics identity. It's messy and we all know it's wrong. Simply put, the Thunder won the 1979 NBA Finals, with a note they were based in Seattle under a different name at the time. Simple and honest.

 

I'm a Dodgers fan and they've won six World Series. I don't "not count" their first one because it happened in Brooklyn. Whether they won it in Brooklyn, Los Angeles, or Detroit, I only care that the franchise won the championship.

 

To me, the biggest offender is the NFL. The NFL has seemingly erased all existence of the pre-Super Bowl era, to the point they only really measure their franchises now by the number of Super Bowls they've won. This makes people think of the Browns as hapless and horrible, because so few people realize they were very good pre-Super Bowl. Both San Diego and Buffalo won championships during their AFL years, but the NFL again seems to pretend a merger never happened.

[Quillz]

On 6/27/2019 at 6:02 PM, Gothamite said:

No, the Dodgers don’t.  The Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles markets are evenly shared by the two home clubs. Neither can veto a move within that market.  And baseball wouldn’t dare disturb those balances by trying to intervene.

 

Contrast that with the Bay Area, where the market has been carved up and the A’s can’t move to San Jose without the consent of (and therefore a very generous payment to) the Giants.

Why is the Bay Area market different from the other markets? What about something like Dallas-Fort Worth? Could MLB add a National League team to that area?

[Quillz]

On 6/28/2019 at 4:09 PM, Brian in Boston said:

However, four years ago, the Dodgers began exploring the possibility of shifting their Class A-Advanced farm team operation from Rancho Cucamonga to the Woodland Hills neighborhood of Los Angeles. The plan was for Peter Guber (a member of the Dodgers ownership group and part-owner of their Triple A affiliate in Oklahoma City) to partner with his friend Peter Lowy (then the CEO of shopping center development/management company Westfield Corporation) on bringing a California League team to the southwestern corner of the San Fernando Valley.

Westfield Corporation was just about to open the Village at Westfield Topanga, a major extension and reimagining of the existing Westfield Topanga shopping center. The resulting facility was the deathblow for the Westfield Promenade, an aging and obsolete mall that had been struggling for the better part of a decade. Lowy had been brainstorming what to do with the land on which the Promenade was located. What if Westfield were to pay to demolish the Promenade and construct a 7,000-seat minor league ballpark on its site, Guber were to secure a California League franchise, and the Dodgers were to run the day-to-day operations? Westfield owned the land on which the stadium was to be built and was willing to foot-the-bill to construct the stadium. Between spaces at the Village at Westfield Topanga and land that would exist around the stadium, ample parking already existed. The project wasn't looking for a dime of public funding. 

Lowy put Westfield architects to work designing a stadium, Guber cleared the idea with Dodgers brass and began lining up financial partners, Dodgers president Stan Kasten broached the subject with MiLB president Pat O'Conner, and Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti was brought into the loop. All the parties loved the idea, so it was floated by MLB commissioner Rob Manfred. Manfred also thought it was a winning idea. It just needed one final approval... that of Arte Moreno, owner of the Angels.

The Dodgers pitched their plan to the Angels. They pointed out that the proposed Woodland Hills ballpark site was a 57-mile drive from Angels Stadium, 19 miles more distant than the trip from Anaheim to the stadium of the Dodgers' current California League affiliate in Rancho Cucamonga. They offered a variety of incentives, including the opportunity to host more of the games in the annual Angels-Dodgers pre-season Freeway Series. The Angels weren't biting. 

They did have a question for the Dodgers: if the Angels someday wished to move a minor league affiliate into the shared Los Angeles/Orange/Ventura County territory of the big league teams, would the Dodgers grant them permission to do so? The Dodgers wanted to know, might such a move be into the City of Los Angeles? The Angels conceded that could be a possibility. The Dodgers said they couldn't envision ever granting the Angels permission to operate a minor league team within the City of Los Angeles.

The Angels refused to sign-off on the plan to allow a Dodgers farm team to set-up shop in Woodland Hills.

Wow, as someone who lives in Woodland Hills, I didn't know any of this. (Granted I really don't follow minor league news at all). For what its worth, that Promenade location is being redeveloped into apartment complexes (probably for the best, really). And that mall has been dead for way more than a decade. I remember it being half abandoned by the late 90s, with the only thing really keeping it going was the movie theater.

[Gothamite]

1 hour ago, Quillz said:

Why is the Bay Area market different from the other markets? What about something like Dallas-Fort Worth? Could MLB add a National League team to that area?

 

The Bay Area is different because the Giants asked for exclusive rights to San Jose, as part of a contemplated move.  Those rights carried over to new ownership, even though they built in San Francisco. To my knowledge, every other team has exclusive market rights. 

[GDAWG]

2 hours ago, Quillz said:

Why is the Bay Area market different from the other markets? What about something like Dallas-Fort Worth? Could MLB add a National League team to that area?

 

The Texas Rangers have the DFW market locked down. 

[leopard88]

12 hours ago, Quillz said:

To me, the biggest offender is the NFL. The NFL has seemingly erased all existence of the pre-Super Bowl era, to the point they only really measure their franchises now by the number of Super Bowls they've won. This makes people think of the Browns as hapless and horrible, because so few people realize they were very good pre-Super Bowl. Both San Diego and Buffalo won championships during their AFL years, but the NFL again seems to pretend a merger never happened.

 

I'll second this.  The NFL is getting ready to celebrate its 100th season, but it acts in many ways as if championships won before 1966 don't count.

[Gothamite]

13 hours ago, Quillz said:

To me, the biggest offender is the NFL. The NFL has seemingly erased all existence of the pre-Super Bowl era, to the point they only really measure their franchises now by the number of Super Bowls they've won. This makes people think of the Browns as hapless and horrible, because so few people realize they were very good pre-Super Bowl. Both San Diego and Buffalo won championships during their AFL years, but the NFL again seems to pretend a merger never happened.

 

I agree that the NFL is completely myopic when it comes to the pre-Super Bowl era.  They should give the 1960 championship every bit the weight they give the 1970 championship, even if the title game itself changed names in between. 

 

But San Diego and Buffalo both won championships of a minor league.  Which is impressive, to be sure, but not quite on the same level.  The AFL championship alone was never equivalent to a world championship.  

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

38 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

But San Diego and Buffalo both won championships of a minor league.  Which is impressive, to be sure, but not quite on the same level.  The AFL championship alone was never equivalent to a world championship.

 

What that establishes that the AFL was not a minor league is the fact that the NFL recognises all AFL stats as equivalent to its own.   A glimpse at any list of NFL records finds AFL events on the list with no special marking. For example, in the list for most points scored in a game by an individual player, amongst the 13 players tied for fourth with 30 points are three who did it in AFL games.  So there could conceivably be an "NFL record" that was set in an AFL game. 

The NFL also gives a kind of recognition to AFL championships: it considers them equivalent to AFC conference championships.  Likewise, it recognises its own pre-1966 league championships as equivalent to NFC conference championships.

This stands in contrast to the AAFC.  The NFL accepted only three teams from that league, one of which folded after a single season in the NFL; whereas it accepted the entire AFL.  The NFL does not recognise AAFC stats as it does AFL stats, nor does it give any level of acknowledgment to the four AAFC championships won by the Browns.  Thus the AAFC counts as a minor league, while the AFL, which is fully integrated into the history of the NFL, does not.

[Gothamite]

11 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

The NFL also gives a kind of recognition to AFL championships: it considers them equivalent to AFC conference championships.

 

Which is appropriate, since the AFL was not the equivalent of the NFL.  It was a minor league that was able to leverage its growth and strength into joining the major leagues. 

 

11 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Likewise, it recognises its own pre-1966 league championships as equivalent to NFC conference championships.

 

Which is offensive to anyone who actually cares about history.

[IceCap]

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

Which is appropriate, since the AFL was not the equivalent of the NFL.  It was a minor league that was able to leverage its growth and strength into joining the major leagues. 

A minor league that went 2-2 against the NFL in their shared championship game? 

[Gothamite]

They started out as a minor league, then leveraged their strength into eventually competing on the NFL’s level.

 

But yeah, the 1960 AFL was definitely a minor league. 

[sky1324]

On 6/30/2019 at 9:43 AM, SFGiants58 said:

 

I’ve always figured that Montréal was the most trouble-free relocation in the same way DC was for the MK I Expos (no realignment, decent temporary stadium, etc.). 

Montreal might be trouble-free, but I think Charlotte would work fine as well. It wouldn't involve any realignment, and while any Major League team would be stuck in the 10,000 seat BB&T Ballpark until they managed to get a new stadium built, I feel like it could work fine for a couple years.