A friend of mine has a theory only the wealthy cities will have teams.
He’s gotten so disillusioned w/ baseball he’s giving up fandom pretty much – The Samson quotes echo the same avarice that sickened him.
I’m talking about a guy who goes to games in full vintage jerseys and buys 10-12 block tickets to games, where will we be when these fans are gone?
I yearn for salary caps and team budget guidelines.
Not sure exactly what this theory consists of. I mean, only the wealthy cities have teams right now (no, that’s not a dis of Oakland or the A’s). Define “wealthy,” the practical threshold below which a league stops existing as a viable entity, and the rational argument why any teams besides the A’s and Rays (or perhaps the Dodgers and Mets, to be quickly replaced by the relocated A’s and Rays) would be contracted.
you better hope to God you don't show up in this little community, because you'll wish you had never come
I think he was positing in terms of 20 yrs from now, from what I understood : a baseball team is now looked at more as a way to make money from a stadium deal and corporate sponsorship (short term investment) as opposed to cultural prestige or asset(long term investment/ pride), i feel like this view is a bit naive but I understand where he’s coming from.
I think he feels that in order to be competitive you need to invest around 100m-150m as opposed to 10yrs ago when that margin was the top of the tops, only metropoli could really risk that investment nowadays, goodbye Bal ,Mil, Min, Oak, K.C., etc.
I mostly agree w/ the latter statement, he’s in his early 40’s and usually goes to about 35+ games a year, he’s no longer going to opening day in protest of Lew.
Hmm… I can kinda see where your friend is coming from, but your friend is a little late to the party, too.
Maybe the 20 team World Premier Baseball League-type entity that your friend is envisioning will happen someday. My two cents plus interest is that if it does, it will be a pushback against what will be an perceived as an archaic set of anti-performance enhancement rules.
Maybe “MLB” is to “dudes playing 1800’s baseball in costume in the park” as “World Premier Robo-Steroid Baseball League” will be to “MLB” someday.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
She tends to report the company line uncritically. Which is fine for the most part, as discussed previously, analysis and opinion aren’t really what beat reporters are paid for.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
All of those fall into “team on the field.” It’s rather broad stroke. Either way, her job is to mostly play the unbiased, voice of what’s going on with the A’s. Delving into the more “explosive” elements of the team is dangerous territory for a beat writer, both in terms of the fans and with the insider info they can gather with the team. It’s better for her not to involve herself in it.
Well sure, it impacts it, but not in any quantifiable and beat reportable way. And as I said, it’s not exactly a safe topic for a beat writer. Puff pieces and general goings on is all your going to see for any be writer.
Yeah, that’s what I was thinking about this too. When there’s actual news, she reports what Lew says, just like she would Billy and Melvin about the roster or lineup. Analyzing stadium issues just seems out of her scope of work.
"Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
That is confusing. Is this the first, HEY WE WANT TO MOVE public statement?
I mean I know that there have been rendering s and talk, but it is always couched in the “we want to stay in oakland, but look at this” kind of a statement.
…sort of a weak halfhearted five-years-too-late opening salvo replica.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
If my wife ends up losing her job in three or four years due to City departmental restructuring caused by huge holes in the general fund, I’m going to be unhappy.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
But…the Kings! Or…the A’s! Or…the Warriors! Or… The Raiders!
None of those teams are going anywhere, imo. Nobody can afford them. And if they try to, they will meet with the same resistance that the niners are right now.
Sounds like Wolff’s worried that the Madson article has some substance behind it. Not that the Madson sources represent the MLB position, but that they represent a faction which is sizeable enough to prevent Selig from seeking a vote at all. It’s been said for a long time, rightly I think, that Selig won’t bring something forward unless he’s sure he’s got near unanimity. If instead he’s looking at possible no votes from 3-6 teams (either those with shared territories who worry about precedents, which seems dubious, or those who are rich and would prefer to contract two poor teams, which seems more possible), then Selig might prefer to continue to take no action. Which then leaves Wolffish to either demand a vote anyway (over Selig’s objections, making more no votes likely), or to give up and re-consider Oakland. Or to sell.
"Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
Another possibility is that the Committee is itself divided, and Madden’s source is someone from the “no” faction of that. Have we ever heard anything about who is on it?
The committee is comprised of longtime baseball executive Bob Starkey, who is currently reviewing the troubled finances of the Los Angeles Dodgers, former Giants executive Corey Busch, who worked for the Giants during 1992 when the territorial rights question was first raised, ironically, to allow the Giants to move into what was then the shared territory of Santa Clara County, and Washington attorney Irwin Raij, who was key in brokering the Washington Nationals’ move from Montreal, which was the league’s last franchise relocation and ballpark construction.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
Selugworth’s method has always been thus, and always transparently been thus. I’ve never understood what Lew was up to with his public statements — either he doesn’t understand how Bud operates (unlikely), can’t do a whip count (ie, doesn’t know which ownership groups besides the Giants uphold the TRgument), or fears Lil’ Stein but thinks vague complaints about pace and process in Bay Area media outlets and po-faced appeals to fairness will sway him and his cabal. Adds up to stupid any way.
you better hope to God you don't show up in this little community, because you'll wish you had never come
I don’t think the “po-faced appeals to fairness” are meant to sway Selig and co. I think they’re simply meant to keep this issue on the front burner and to keep public opinion firmly on the “A’s to SJ” side. The A’s know they have no further ability to expedite a decision; they’re hoping that public opinion, or even outrage, is the only way to get Selig to speed up the process.
I think the A’s are well aware that demanding a vote would be untenable due to the reason FSU pointed out, and both the A’s and MLB are obviously opposed to reconsidering Oakland. They’re not ready to give up and sell yet, so waiting (and occasional futile PR attempts) is basically their only option at this point.
Outrage … Among whom? The A’s fans they’ve tarped over? The potential S Bay fans they’ve not bothered cultivating? The Giants fans? The local Sawx and Yanx boosters? I’m having a hard time imagining a realistic audience for these protestations.
you better hope to God you don't show up in this little community, because you'll wish you had never come
Right, I didn’t say it’d be effective and outrage is probably the wrong word. But my impression is that ever since the Howard Bryant piece (which incidentally sparked more national interest in the A’s situation than anything Wolff managed to do the last couple of years), the national writers have bought into the “A’s must move” line of thought and questioned why MLB has taken so long to make a decision, which has in turn probably influenced most casual public opinion to be on this side as well. The A’s probably think it’s beneficial to keep this momentum and refute anything that expresses a contrary opinion, like that Madden piece.
And if anything, stuff like this will always give people like Purdy something to write about to further The Cause.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
The Yankees don’t want to set a precedent that territorial rights can be voided, lest they end up with another team in their backyard cutting into their revenues and competitive advantage.
Lew seems to be arguing here that it wouldn’t set such a precedent, it would just be making the territorial rights situation in the Bay Area the same as it already is in NY, LA and Chicago.
Interesting, and that would lend credence to mb’s suggestion that this statement is aimed at Steinbrenner.
What was the situation for the Nationals like? Building a ballpark within 38 miles of Camden Yards seems like the precedent would already be set. Legally speaking (ignoring the “thou can not sue” and anti-trustness, wouldn’t that be a big sign saying “Unfair practices” in your treatment of your franchises?
The Orioles didn’t have territorial rights to DC, so there was nothing in the rules to stop another team from moving there. But they did fight for (and receive) compensation because having the Nationals move in reduced the value of their regional broadcast rights.
I have no logic to support it, other than the very strong gut feeling that Bill Madden was talking to somebody named H___ Steinbrenner.
If he was talking to a Steinbrenner, then I take the idea of the current dual markets voting no to protect their own long-term interests very seriously.
If Hank or Hal feels that way, that means that Jerry Reinsdorf probably feels that way too.
I don’t see the NL teams doing anything but nodding along as silent partners, but that’s enough.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
Yeah, Reinsdorf’s the key…if he was sending the shared-market fear of precedent signals that the NYY’s seem to be sending, that probably would mean the end of the South Bay for the A’s. Reinsdorf is probably Selig’s closest ally and most influential owner in MLB’s inner circle.
"Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
or fears Lil’ Stein but thinks vague complaints about pace and process in Bay Area media outlets and po-faced appeals to fairness will sway him and his cabal.
?
What does this mean?
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
Well, we know the Giants are opposed. The most obvious candidate for another franchise to be opposed is NYY; Steinbrenners probably have a small coterie of friends in The OBC, and can muster and maintain minority blockade indefinitely. But if Lew names the Yankees or the Steinbrenners publicly as obstacles, he’s broken the circle of trust, and can be counted on to be actively selling off/begging a buyout of his share (Fisher is another story entirely; no idea what his stance is).
you better hope to God you don't show up in this little community, because you'll wish you had never come
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
I don’t think Wolff is that close — and by his increasingly panicked/desperate reactions, I think he knows it.
Going outside the rules of decorum, I think, makes it unlikelier that he’ll succeed — he;s pissing off his key stakeholders, precisely the people he needs to be winning over (see Sal’s #3 from today’s grill).
Even if they do get the stadium, A’s won’t be enough of a moneymaker to enable Lew to buy out Fisher. And if they are enough of a moneymaker, why would Fisher sell low internally to Wolff?
Far likelier that Fisher (or another silent/not so silent partner, new or old) buys out Wolff when SJ goes down in flames. Or that Wolff sells his share high on success of SJ.
you better hope to God you don't show up in this little community, because you'll wish you had never come
I just do the math that Wolf is a Billionaire and the team would cost whatever (much less than $300mil?) to buy. I have no idea who might be the next owner of the team.
==
I totally don’t get the ‘A’s will build the stadium and then sell’ thought. You aren’t saying that here, but it comes up now and then.
==
Wolff’s tactics – going outside decorum…lots of room to agree, watching. Nobody really calls this down on Hank Steinbrenner, though we don’t hear from him so much these days.
==
Regret, I am not insider enough to know who Sal is (I will try to attend a FKup this year, if possible).
Wolff is a millionaire, Fischer is the resident billionaire . If anyone’s buying anyone out, it’s Fischer. But odds are, if SJ is successful, they all sell high. While I still see SJ as highly likely, the only thing I saw from Wolff this week is more his ugly “bipolar” business strategy than desperation.
MLB-recorded minutes clearly indicate that the Giants were granted Santa Clara, subject to relocating to the city of Santa Clara.
I didn’t realize there was a dispute over whether the Giants actually have the T rights to Santa Clara County since they didn’t build there. Strange that Wolff is just now deciding to push that angle if he’s got the goods. That seems like it would be a very strong point to press on the other owners.
Assuming the A’s characterization is correct and the original understanding clearly made the T-rights contingent, that would give them a Legal argument. Contracts can sometimes be reformed for reasons such as “mutual mistake†(i.e. all parties overlooked something that was meant to be included).
However, the A’s would have a massive burden of trying to prove this, especially after all these years. It’s usually pretty much of a long shot argument. And remember, the A’s are prohibited from suing MLB or the Giants.
So, this fact, if true, is mostly useful from a PR and balancing of the equities standpoint (e.g. convincing other owners and/or arbitrating the dispute, if it comes to that).
Anyone who thinks this is earthshattering news that has been overlooked by now is mistaken. I can assure you, at this point the A’s lawyers can probably recite relevant sections of the MLB constitution and those meeting minutes by heart.
"Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
Is there a certain statute of limitations on something like that and how would it be applicable? Does that little note get disregarded just because one’s challenged for nearly 20 years? Or would it be disregarded simply because common “belief” has been wrong for nearly 20 years? Also, should we give a shit about the “legal” standing of it when if the A’s were to challenge it, it would be the arbiter deciding, in which, “law” doesn’t necessary apply in a straightforward manner?
“The Commissioner has asked us to refrain from discussing the territorial rights issue publicly. Out of respect for his request, we will limit our response to setting the record straight on the history of territorial rights discuss the territorial rights issue publicly.”
Most significantly in 1994, Major League Baseball conducted a comprehensive review and re-definition of each club’s territories.
Upon purchasing the team 20 years ago, our plan to revive the franchise relied heavily on targeting and solidifying our fan base in the largest and fastest growing county within our territory
The whole thing is just a PR move. Forget about legal stances, the A’s goal is/should be to set it up in the court of public opinion so that if the owners uphold the T-rights, MLB as a whole loses and looks bad. The more people talk about it (particularly outside the bay area) in a manner of “what the fuck are you doing, MLB, this is a bullshit move” the better. Right now, the A’s are that “plucky AAA team that they made a movie about, look how unfair they’re being treated.” Depending on Wolff/Fisher’s political connections, they may use that public opinion as ammo for said political connection to remove the anti-trust on the DL. The only way for that to have any chance of working is if their situation remains in the news on some level (it doesn’t matter how) as long as the message is somehow saying “the A’s should be in SJ”.
That too. But given the Gnats response, maybe the A’s release was more a calculated move to speed things along. Having two clubs publicly hash it out in the media is certainly something that would force Selig to step in and finally act. I’m sure both points have been made over and over again privately. I’m sure both have something to do with the price that ultimately gets paid, but I suspect the A’s move also has to do with taking advantage of an opportunity to put a little more pressure on the accelerator.
Verducci = my prognosticative hero of the day. I would link to SI itself, but it keeps adding shit to the link and pissing me off.
He’s predicting that the new 15 team league system will only last for a while, the next step being full geographic realignment and the death of the individual leagues, as well as full adoption of the DH.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
It’s vaguely related, although I was trying to post this in the Grill…
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
Geographical realignment is the next step that may prove too tempting for owners and players to resist. It builds on regional rivalries, reduces travel costs, allows more games to be telecast locally in prime time, and breaks down close enough to pool teams with similar revenues.
But when he goes all “NL is like chess, AL is like checkers” I remember why I stopped reading him regularly.
"Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
Here’s another way of looking at things:
Surely there is some amount of money (probably somewhere in the 9 figures range) that the Giants would take in order to give up their territorial rights. And there is some amount of money that the A’s would be willing to pay. So, despite the carefully-worded claims from both sides that they haven’t discussed a buyout of the rights, it’s pretty clear that’s what will happen, and as the saying goes, we are now merely haggling over the price.
The A’s are arguing that the price should be zero (or at least insignificant) because those territorial rights are basically a historical accident, and because they would actually be moving farther away from SF.
The Giants counter that the fact that those rights have real value (evidently!) and that that value was reflected in the purchase prices of both teams by their current ownership groups.
And honestly, to at least some extent the Giants are going to win that argument. The other owners, even those who aren’t in a two-team market, aren’t going to agree to take something of value away from the Giants without fair compensation.
Now the more speculative part:
The A’s and Giants are far enough apart on a price that the league is trying to arbitrate. The Committee either already has, or at some point will, put a price tag on those rights. And, either
1) they have already come up with a figure that the A’s are willing to accept, but the Giants aren’t. The A’s want to hold (and presumably think they will win) a vote of other owners to force the Giants to accept that price.
or
2) Both sides are lobbying the Committee for a more favorable price for their side (and also lobbying in advance for the vote of owners that will follow).
Well, I just one-linered it while you actually developed the thesis. With which I agree, especially about the owners tending to favor the Giants on the price point. The interesting question becomes, then, what if Selig and MLB reach agreement to let the A’s go to San Jose, but the price is higher than what Wolffish are willing to pay?
"Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
Yeah. Based on more speculative reading between the lines, it seems like the A’s don’t expect that to happen. Whether that expectation is realistic is hard to say.
Good point. If the A’s and Giants are too far apart on compensation, other teams could decide that it’s in the league’s best interest to cover the difference and get the situation resolved.
Reading anything about this whole saga pretty much sucks out any interest I can muster for the A’s and baseball in general. Most of the time, I cannot even get interested on a Kremlinology level. Tell me if/when they’re moving. Don’t expect me to follow the team if it’s bad/uninteresting.
There’s an entire website that promotes its access to Wolff and Beane as a competitive advantage. They do regular sympathetic interviews and everything.
It was definitely one of the main factors driving me to root for individual players rather than a team.
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
Are any of these A’s players? If so, why? I can’t think of anyone on this team that excites me as an individual. I kinda like Coco and Jemile but I wouldn’t tune in to watch them or anything. It’s all laundry for me.
This. For my birthday I am to buy a uniform. I know a place to find them a bit more ahem afforably. But I would do better with current players. It has been a month and I am still having trouble.
(Of course I am having the same issue with a Raider jersey but for slightly different reasons. I really just want like a Stabler/Belitnikoff/Plunkett and a Cap’n Sal in any of the old pullovers-I don’t know why there isnt a huge market for it.)
I’ve already asked for a Stabler jersey for my birthday in June. One of the many cool things about the Raider game parking lot scene is the hundreds of different jerseys you see walk by.
"Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
I like Carter’s baseball annihilating ability, and I also think he just seems like a nice man. I’d like to see him succeed and disprove all the haters.
Brandon McCarthy because he’s smart
Dallas Braden because he’s got charisma for days and he’s funny
Wes Timmons because he has cool hair and he’s this year’s camp’s most rootable underdog
Bryce Harper because he’s an arrogant little prick who’s gonna back it up (my new baseball equivalent of hate sex… I’ve been abstinent on that front since Barry Bonds retired)
Gio Gonzalez because he’s one of the few men on the entire planet that I for some reason don’t find to be at least a little bit icky
Davey Johnson because he’s an ornery old FK with one last chance to win it all
Tim Lincecum
Jamie Moyer
Eri Yoshida
probably a few more I can’t think of off the top of my head
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
Michael Taylor too, because I think he has the potential to make a great broadcaster someday.
Korach/Taylor/Slusser booth 2020?
\"Weren\'t you already aware the Kay is already writing everyone\'s story? We\'re all just characters who believe we are real. Things make more sense now, don\'t they. Be honest.\"- DMOAS
Yes, no kidding. I saw a lot of parents having no fun. Kids too.
Our visit was sandwiched between Leap Day (which one Disney employee told me was the worst shift of his life) and a bomb scare. Luckily our trip went well. We followed the suggestions of many people here and took it easy. We arrived early hit a few rides while the lines where short (including Nemo) and returned to the hotel for naps. In the afternoon we hit a bunch of rides including Pirates of the Caribbean, Thunder Mountain Railroad and Splash Mountin. Turns out my daughter loves roller coasters. She must get that from her mom.
Disneyland is an amazing place. Whether you love it or hate it, the attention to detail is incredible. Nothing is out of place, everything is perfectly choreographed. Sometimes it’s a little hard to tell where the animatronics end and the real people begin.
I managed to find enjoyment in the experience despite not really being a fan and the rest of the family really enjoyed it.
Lew Wolff’s willingness to advise the world that the A’s are looking to get off MLB’s revenue sharing program, and how this would be a benefit to the owners is a blunder. Half of the other teams are on the revenue sharing program, and they are surely not all that enthused about Wolff airing out his ideas about revenue sharing.
Quite often there’s unintentional real info in the offhand remarks of Lew Wolff. His comments explaining that player salary should be 50% of revenues, and also that the A’s benefited financially because the World Series went seven games – you don’t really hear other team owners saying this stuff. Lew Wolff is definitely starting to break ranks.
The A’s with their press release are directly addressing the Yankees – Mets – Phillies – Red Sox voting block, teams looking at down the road at possibly needing to protect their own “territorial rights,†with the A’s pitching the idea of getting off welfare to the richer teams…
Okay, sorry, I posted before reading all the comments – my comments simply echo andeux’s thoughts about the Jankees and other teams possibly keeping in mind the threat of the Rays moving to the Northeast.
Excellent points. I’d also add — the rest of the half of teams who receive revenue sharing? They ALL, except for Tampa, have relatively new stadiums. Just getting a new stadium is no guarantee of going off the teat.
And, as we’ve mentioned before, without a good tv deal (and being locked in LT for a crappy one), new stadium revenue on its own ain’t gonna move the A’s out of the financial cellar in the ALW.
This franchise is FKed until they get a new owner who knows what he’s doing.
you better hope to God you don't show up in this little community, because you'll wish you had never come
“This franchise is FKed until they get a new owner who knows what he’s doing.”
Hi Monkeyball – I am gonna try to learn how to do the blocked quotes and maybe some photos – apologies in advance if it doesn’t go all that well at first. I will improve!
May I post any/pirated photos from the web – or is that uncool?
==
One thing I’ve noticed about A’s ownership, include Billy, is their real need to present themselves as Jet Setters: claiming a ‘relationship’ with the big English soccer team, trying to spin 8 years of rebuilding as ‘Plan 2015’…
Blockquotes are done by the “b-quote” button above the comment-drafting window. Wanton photo posting is common. Llama is sal. TV deal terms are unknown and speculative; there may be an out clause if the A’s move to San Jose.
"Kraut will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no kraut."
If there’s no out clause, they’re pretty much fked. A big portion of their new revenue is going to pay off the stadium loans. Add on the possibility of having to pay off the giants and (at worst) pay into revenue sharing or (at best) not getting any revenue sharing.
Even Slusser seems puzzled as to what exactly this press release is supposed to accomplish.
Meanwhile David Samson does his best to make Wolff look like a great owner and PR master.
A friend of mine has a theory only the wealthy cities will have teams.
He’s gotten so disillusioned w/ baseball he’s giving up fandom pretty much – The Samson quotes echo the same avarice that sickened him.
I’m talking about a guy who goes to games in full vintage jerseys and buys 10-12 block tickets to games, where will we be when these fans are gone?
I yearn for salary caps and team budget guidelines.
Not sure exactly what this theory consists of. I mean, only the wealthy cities have teams right now (no, that’s not a dis of Oakland or the A’s). Define “wealthy,” the practical threshold below which a league stops existing as a viable entity, and the rational argument why any teams besides the A’s and Rays (or perhaps the Dodgers and Mets, to be quickly replaced by the relocated A’s and Rays) would be contracted.
I think he was positing in terms of 20 yrs from now, from what I understood : a baseball team is now looked at more as a way to make money from a stadium deal and corporate sponsorship (short term investment) as opposed to cultural prestige or asset(long term investment/ pride), i feel like this view is a bit naive but I understand where he’s coming from.
I think he feels that in order to be competitive you need to invest around 100m-150m as opposed to 10yrs ago when that margin was the top of the tops, only metropoli could really risk that investment nowadays, goodbye Bal ,Mil, Min, Oak, K.C., etc.
I mostly agree w/ the latter statement, he’s in his early 40’s and usually goes to about 35+ games a year, he’s no longer going to opening day in protest of Lew.
Hmm… I can kinda see where your friend is coming from, but your friend is a little late to the party, too.
Maybe the 20 team World Premier Baseball League-type entity that your friend is envisioning will happen someday. My two cents plus interest is that if it does, it will be a pushback against what will be an perceived as an archaic set of anti-performance enhancement rules.
Maybe “MLB” is to “dudes playing 1800’s baseball in costume in the park” as “World Premier Robo-Steroid Baseball League” will be to “MLB” someday.
TWDSS
/South Carolina Republicans
Why “Even” Slusser? She’s never worshipped at the commode of Wolff as far as I can remember.
because dot college I played tumblr for dot com.
or something like that…
She tends to report the company line uncritically. Which is fine for the most part, as discussed previously, analysis and opinion aren’t really what beat reporters are paid for.
More than that, she’s really stayed off the entire stadium story — chron has used either local-beat or business reporters for it.
as it should be.
Uh, why?
A beat writer should be focused on the day-to-day aspects of the team on the field, not so much the business of the game?
So she shouldn’t cover the draft or minor-league acquisitions? Or when players get arrested? Or Rickey?
All of those fall into “team on the field.” It’s rather broad stroke. Either way, her job is to mostly play the unbiased, voice of what’s going on with the A’s. Delving into the more “explosive” elements of the team is dangerous territory for a beat writer, both in terms of the fans and with the insider info they can gather with the team. It’s better for her not to involve herself in it.
How does the stadium not impact what’s on the field (by Lew’s own account) at least as much as the elements I cited?
Well sure, it impacts it, but not in any quantifiable and beat reportable way. And as I said, it’s not exactly a safe topic for a beat writer. Puff pieces and general goings on is all your going to see for any be writer.
Beat writers shouldn’t write full on op-ed pieces. Exactly what is there to write about on the stadium that isn’t heresy and/or conflicting rumors?
Yeah, that’s what I was thinking about this too. When there’s actual news, she reports what Lew says, just like she would Billy and Melvin about the roster or lineup. Analyzing stadium issues just seems out of her scope of work.
That is confusing. Is this the first, HEY WE WANT TO MOVE public statement?
I mean I know that there have been rendering s and talk, but it is always couched in the “we want to stay in oakland, but look at this” kind of a statement.
I was wondering that too.
Regardless, I don’t mind seeing these kinds of statements. At this point, the more noise made, the better.
That’s how I read it…
…sort of a weak halfhearted five-years-too-late opening salvo replica.
Well, at least the Kings finally got over the ownership/gub’ment hurdles.
If my wife ends up losing her job in three or four years due to City departmental restructuring caused by huge holes in the general fund, I’m going to be unhappy.
But…the Kings! Or…the A’s! Or…the Warriors! Or… The Raiders!
None of those teams are going anywhere, imo. Nobody can afford them. And if they try to, they will meet with the same resistance that the niners are right now.
Sports are not a priority, nor should they be.
Sounds like Wolff’s worried that the Madson article has some substance behind it. Not that the Madson sources represent the MLB position, but that they represent a faction which is sizeable enough to prevent Selig from seeking a vote at all. It’s been said for a long time, rightly I think, that Selig won’t bring something forward unless he’s sure he’s got near unanimity. If instead he’s looking at possible no votes from 3-6 teams (either those with shared territories who worry about precedents, which seems dubious, or those who are rich and would prefer to contract two poor teams, which seems more possible), then Selig might prefer to continue to take no action. Which then leaves Wolffish to either demand a vote anyway (over Selig’s objections, making more no votes likely), or to give up and re-consider Oakland. Or to sell.
Another possibility is that the Committee is itself divided, and Madden’s source is someone from the “no” faction of that. Have we ever heard anything about who is on it?
Link
Raij against the machine!
win again…
This. (Also, possibly, andeux’ conjecture.)
Selugworth’s method has always been thus, and always transparently been thus. I’ve never understood what Lew was up to with his public statements — either he doesn’t understand how Bud operates (unlikely), can’t do a whip count (ie, doesn’t know which ownership groups besides the Giants uphold the TRgument), or fears Lil’ Stein but thinks vague complaints about pace and process in Bay Area media outlets and po-faced appeals to fairness will sway him and his cabal. Adds up to stupid any way.
I don’t think the “po-faced appeals to fairness” are meant to sway Selig and co. I think they’re simply meant to keep this issue on the front burner and to keep public opinion firmly on the “A’s to SJ” side. The A’s know they have no further ability to expedite a decision; they’re hoping that public opinion, or even outrage, is the only way to get Selig to speed up the process.
I think the A’s are well aware that demanding a vote would be untenable due to the reason FSU pointed out, and both the A’s and MLB are obviously opposed to reconsidering Oakland. They’re not ready to give up and sell yet, so waiting (and occasional futile PR attempts) is basically their only option at this point.
Outrage … Among whom? The A’s fans they’ve tarped over? The potential S Bay fans they’ve not bothered cultivating? The Giants fans? The local Sawx and Yanx boosters? I’m having a hard time imagining a realistic audience for these protestations.
Right, I didn’t say it’d be effective and outrage is probably the wrong word. But my impression is that ever since the Howard Bryant piece (which incidentally sparked more national interest in the A’s situation than anything Wolff managed to do the last couple of years), the national writers have bought into the “A’s must move” line of thought and questioned why MLB has taken so long to make a decision, which has in turn probably influenced most casual public opinion to be on this side as well. The A’s probably think it’s beneficial to keep this momentum and refute anything that expresses a contrary opinion, like that Madden piece.
And if anything, stuff like this will always give people like Purdy something to write about to further The Cause.
Well, they’re kinda right. It’s basically BS that they’ve taken this long to make a decision one way or the other.
Thanks, and go As.
I think the decision has already been made; the delay is getting the votes.
Those two statements are contradictory.
Yankees = Russia
White Sox = China
unless the Angels are China
Wouldn’t the Yankees prefer that the A’s get a new stadium so they are no longer nursing on the revenue sharing teat?
Angels, OTOH…
The Yankees don’t want to set a precedent that territorial rights can be voided, lest they end up with another team in their backyard cutting into their revenues and competitive advantage.
Lew seems to be arguing here that it wouldn’t set such a precedent, it would just be making the territorial rights situation in the Bay Area the same as it already is in NY, LA and Chicago.
Interesting, and that would lend credence to mb’s suggestion that this statement is aimed at Steinbrenner.
What was the situation for the Nationals like? Building a ballpark within 38 miles of Camden Yards seems like the precedent would already be set. Legally speaking (ignoring the “thou can not sue” and anti-trustness, wouldn’t that be a big sign saying “Unfair practices” in your treatment of your franchises?
The Orioles didn’t have territorial rights to DC, so there was nothing in the rules to stop another team from moving there. But they did fight for (and receive) compensation because having the Nationals move in reduced the value of their regional broadcast rights.
Which is sort of proof of just how insanely arbitrary T-rights are. If the O’s didn’t T-Rights 40 miles away, why do the Giants or anyone else?
I have no logic to support it, other than the very strong gut feeling that Bill Madden was talking to somebody named H___ Steinbrenner.
If he was talking to a Steinbrenner, then I take the idea of the current dual markets voting no to protect their own long-term interests very seriously.
If Hank or Hal feels that way, that means that Jerry Reinsdorf probably feels that way too.
I don’t see the NL teams doing anything but nodding along as silent partners, but that’s enough.
Yet Reinsdorf seemed enthusiastic about the A’s moving to a local that would let them stop collecting revenue sharing.
I’ll try and find the article…
Yeah, Reinsdorf’s the key…if he was sending the shared-market fear of precedent signals that the NYY’s seem to be sending, that probably would mean the end of the South Bay for the A’s. Reinsdorf is probably Selig’s closest ally and most influential owner in MLB’s inner circle.
Moreno apparently does not = China
and Reinsdorf isn’t China either apparently.
Not seeing a 3rd Chicago team in the crystal ball…
There’s the Brewers only 90 miles away.
That’s certainly not obvious; it may not even be true.
IIRC, Selig had been opposed to Oakland even acquiring a team in the first place, no?
?
What does this mean?
Well, we know the Giants are opposed. The most obvious candidate for another franchise to be opposed is NYY; Steinbrenners probably have a small coterie of friends in The OBC, and can muster and maintain minority blockade indefinitely. But if Lew names the Yankees or the Steinbrenners publicly as obstacles, he’s broken the circle of trust, and can be counted on to be actively selling off/begging a buyout of his share (Fisher is another story entirely; no idea what his stance is).
Thanks, doc.
I didn’t know you called Halank ” ‘lil Stein”
Wolff is too close to winning to sell. It’s not happening.
My guess is the opposite – Wolff, the Baron of SJ, will buy out Fisher at some point.
The A’s are a moneymaker.
==
Totally agree it’s looking like Wolff is going outside the rules of decorum.
I don’t think Wolff is that close — and by his increasingly panicked/desperate reactions, I think he knows it.
Going outside the rules of decorum, I think, makes it unlikelier that he’ll succeed — he;s pissing off his key stakeholders, precisely the people he needs to be winning over (see Sal’s #3 from today’s grill).
Even if they do get the stadium, A’s won’t be enough of a moneymaker to enable Lew to buy out Fisher. And if they are enough of a moneymaker, why would Fisher sell low internally to Wolff?
Far likelier that Fisher (or another silent/not so silent partner, new or old) buys out Wolff when SJ goes down in flames. Or that Wolff sells his share high on success of SJ.
I just do the math that Wolf is a Billionaire and the team would cost whatever (much less than $300mil?) to buy. I have no idea who might be the next owner of the team.
==
I totally don’t get the ‘A’s will build the stadium and then sell’ thought. You aren’t saying that here, but it comes up now and then.
==
Wolff’s tactics – going outside decorum…lots of room to agree, watching. Nobody really calls this down on Hank Steinbrenner, though we don’t hear from him so much these days.
==
Regret, I am not insider enough to know who Sal is (I will try to attend a FKup this year, if possible).
I don’t think Wolff is a billionaire, or really even very close.
Sal is llama
…for now.
This is wrong. Sal is “THE” llama… for now.
My kids are fond of this.
Wolff is a millionaire, Fischer is the resident billionaire . If anyone’s buying anyone out, it’s Fischer. But odds are, if SJ is successful, they all sell high. While I still see SJ as highly likely, the only thing I saw from Wolff this week is more his ugly “bipolar” business strategy than desperation.
Mark Purdy points to this part of the statement:
I didn’t realize there was a dispute over whether the Giants actually have the T rights to Santa Clara County since they didn’t build there. Strange that Wolff is just now deciding to push that angle if he’s got the goods. That seems like it would be a very strong point to press on the other owners.
Nah, this isn’t new. newballpark commenter bartleby nailed it when he wrote:
I prefer not to accept this explanation.
Ummm… is there a T-rights contract, or just the board action? If the latter, and that representation is accurate, everything bartleby says is wrong.
Hey, don’t shoot the scrivener.
He would prefer not to.
MLB Constitution is what he and others cite.
Fair enough. Shows how much attention I pay
Is there a certain statute of limitations on something like that and how would it be applicable? Does that little note get disregarded just because one’s challenged for nearly 20 years? Or would it be disregarded simply because common “belief” has been wrong for nearly 20 years? Also, should we give a shit about the “legal” standing of it when if the A’s were to challenge it, it would be the arbiter deciding, in which, “law” doesn’t necessary apply in a straightforward manner?
Yeah, since that point’s kinda the foundation of the entire Giants’ assholery, it seems like a rather important fact to hammer down.
I’m no lawyer but I am a (former) professional copy editor, and that comma would seem to undermine any such claim.
In any event, arguing on these hairsplitting lines against entrenched opinions ain’t gonna do Lew any good.
Giants issued a response
How do I issue a press release telling the Giants to go FK themselves?
Also,
I’m pretty confident that Thomas Jefferson didn’t write the MLB constitution, so enough with the capitalization.
/all the other MLB owners when Magowan self-financed WWP
I don’t know much about that blog’s readership, but most of those particular Giants fans seem to support the A’s moving to San Jose.
??
The whole thing is just a PR move. Forget about legal stances, the A’s goal is/should be to set it up in the court of public opinion so that if the owners uphold the T-rights, MLB as a whole loses and looks bad. The more people talk about it (particularly outside the bay area) in a manner of “what the fuck are you doing, MLB, this is a bullshit move” the better. Right now, the A’s are that “plucky AAA team that they made a movie about, look how unfair they’re being treated.” Depending on Wolff/Fisher’s political connections, they may use that public opinion as ammo for said political connection to remove the anti-trust on the DL. The only way for that to have any chance of working is if their situation remains in the news on some level (it doesn’t matter how) as long as the message is somehow saying “the A’s should be in SJ”.
Less PR than positioning for the final price negotiations with the SFGs, I suspect.
That too. But given the Gnats response, maybe the A’s release was more a calculated move to speed things along. Having two clubs publicly hash it out in the media is certainly something that would force Selig to step in and finally act. I’m sure both points have been made over and over again privately. I’m sure both have something to do with the price that ultimately gets paid, but I suspect the A’s move also has to do with taking advantage of an opportunity to put a little more pressure on the accelerator.
the brewers TV guys were talking about it sympathetically yesterday on their TV broadcast
Verducci = my prognosticative hero of the day. I would link to SI itself, but it keeps adding shit to the link and pissing me off.
He’s predicting that the new 15 team league system will only last for a while, the next step being full geographic realignment and the death of the individual leagues, as well as full adoption of the DH.
It’s vaguely related, although I was trying to post this in the Grill…
Here. This sounds persuasive:
But when he goes all “NL is like chess, AL is like checkers” I remember why I stopped reading him regularly.
Wow does he think highly of his overinflated opinion of the “strategy” “lost” because of the DH.
OMG DOOD DBL SWITCHS R HARD
Thanks, and go As.
Well, they sure befuddled Bob The First
As did many other concepts about baseball.
Here’s another way of looking at things:
Surely there is some amount of money (probably somewhere in the 9 figures range) that the Giants would take in order to give up their territorial rights. And there is some amount of money that the A’s would be willing to pay. So, despite the carefully-worded claims from both sides that they haven’t discussed a buyout of the rights, it’s pretty clear that’s what will happen, and as the saying goes, we are now merely haggling over the price.
The A’s are arguing that the price should be zero (or at least insignificant) because those territorial rights are basically a historical accident, and because they would actually be moving farther away from SF.
The Giants counter that the fact that those rights have real value (evidently!) and that that value was reflected in the purchase prices of both teams by their current ownership groups.
And honestly, to at least some extent the Giants are going to win that argument. The other owners, even those who aren’t in a two-team market, aren’t going to agree to take something of value away from the Giants without fair compensation.
Now the more speculative part:
The A’s and Giants are far enough apart on a price that the league is trying to arbitrate. The Committee either already has, or at some point will, put a price tag on those rights. And, either
1) they have already come up with a figure that the A’s are willing to accept, but the Giants aren’t. The A’s want to hold (and presumably think they will win) a vote of other owners to force the Giants to accept that price.
or
2) Both sides are lobbying the Committee for a more favorable price for their side (and also lobbying in advance for the vote of owners that will follow).
Or: what FSU said in one sentence above.
Well, I just one-linered it while you actually developed the thesis. With which I agree, especially about the owners tending to favor the Giants on the price point. The interesting question becomes, then, what if Selig and MLB reach agreement to let the A’s go to San Jose, but the price is higher than what Wolffish are willing to pay?
Yeah. Based on more speculative reading between the lines, it seems like the A’s don’t expect that to happen. Whether that expectation is realistic is hard to say.
endorsed
Another possibility is that MLB participates in the compensation of the Giants.
Good point. If the A’s and Giants are too far apart on compensation, other teams could decide that it’s in the league’s best interest to cover the difference and get the situation resolved.
I kinda want a pot pie.
I wouldnt mind some pot and we got a pie for dessert…
I want blueberry pie. But it’s bedtime, no PIE MOB for me. Next week, though, I’m off the morning shift….
Is there a pie mob tonight? I had no idea, of course.
Some day I really must join one of these pie mobs I’ve been hearing about.
We need to have a pie mob soon….maybe next week!!
WANT.
No, there wasn’t one…but that’s how they start, by people publicizing their pie-ish desires!
And hands up all those who want the new ballpark, wherever it is, to have pie!
Reading anything about this whole saga pretty much sucks out any interest I can muster for the A’s and baseball in general. Most of the time, I cannot even get interested on a Kremlinology level. Tell me if/when they’re moving. Don’t expect me to follow the team if it’s bad/uninteresting.
agreed.
Thanks, and go As.
second
I really enjoy talking about the ballpark issue because it’s fun to get in high dudgeon over Crywolffisher’s incompetence.
That’s really the thing that unites A’s fans of all ballpark perspectives.
Not really. The rabidly pro-SJ and boosterish GO A’S!!!1! crowd thinks poor goodhearted Unka Lew is getting shafted by Neukom and the Brotherhood.
There’s an entire website that promotes its access to Wolff and Beane as a competitive advantage. They do regular sympathetic interviews and everything.
Flag on the play…illegal use of meta. Email a 15 yard penalty and repeat the thread…
Fixed.
Flag on the play…illegal use of meta. Email a 15 yard penalty and
repeatdelete the thread…I would like to subscribe to your newsletter
And yet you got mad at me for saying that they were blowing Billy during the interviews.
High Dudgeon? Say, didn’t you used to… Anyway, I’ll be looking for somewhere to employ that term.
It was definitely one of the main factors driving me to root for individual players rather than a team.
Are any of these A’s players? If so, why? I can’t think of anyone on this team that excites me as an individual. I kinda like Coco and Jemile but I wouldn’t tune in to watch them or anything. It’s all laundry for me.
This. For my birthday I am to buy a uniform. I know a place to find them a bit more ahem afforably. But I would do better with current players. It has been a month and I am still having trouble.
(Of course I am having the same issue with a Raider jersey but for slightly different reasons. I really just want like a Stabler/Belitnikoff/Plunkett and a Cap’n Sal in any of the old pullovers-I don’t know why there isnt a huge market for it.)
I’ve already asked for a Stabler jersey for my birthday in June. One of the many cool things about the Raider game parking lot scene is the hundreds of different jerseys you see walk by.
I’m excited for Cespedes, Milone, McCarthy, Braden and Carter.
I’m kinda curious about Cespedes, and Carter’s brutishly entertaining as well.
I like Carter’s baseball annihilating ability, and I also think he just seems like a nice man. I’d like to see him succeed and disprove all the haters.
Me too
That’s why I want Taylor to succeed.
Thanks, and go As.
Stanford guys are on their own.
Brandon McCarthy because he’s smart
Dallas Braden because he’s got charisma for days and he’s funny
Wes Timmons because he has cool hair and he’s this year’s camp’s most rootable underdog
Bryce Harper because he’s an arrogant little prick who’s gonna back it up (my new baseball equivalent of hate sex… I’ve been abstinent on that front since Barry Bonds retired)
Gio Gonzalez because he’s one of the few men on the entire planet that I for some reason don’t find to be at least a little bit icky
Davey Johnson because he’s an ornery old FK with one last chance to win it all
Tim Lincecum
Jamie Moyer
Eri Yoshida
probably a few more I can’t think of off the top of my head
that’s a good list
Michael Taylor too, because I think he has the potential to make a great broadcaster someday.
Korach/Taylor/Slusser booth 2020?
Or Hatteberg, if he isn’t GM by then.
I have hopes (faint hopes) that Michael Taylor could still be playing baseball in 2020.
+1 on Harper, except I think it’s kind overblown.
Thanks, and go As.
talent or character?
character.
people seem to forget that he’s like 19 still
Thanks, and go As.
I’m finally back from southern california. Thanks to everyone who gave suggestions for surviving Disneyland. We survived and even had some fun.
Whoo hoo!
Yay!
Good. Sometimes it can be tough for a parent to have fun there
Yes, no kidding. I saw a lot of parents having no fun. Kids too.
Our visit was sandwiched between Leap Day (which one Disney employee told me was the worst shift of his life) and a bomb scare. Luckily our trip went well. We followed the suggestions of many people here and took it easy. We arrived early hit a few rides while the lines where short (including Nemo) and returned to the hotel for naps. In the afternoon we hit a bunch of rides including Pirates of the Caribbean, Thunder Mountain Railroad and Splash Mountin. Turns out my daughter loves roller coasters. She must get that from her mom.
Disneyland is an amazing place. Whether you love it or hate it, the attention to detail is incredible. Nothing is out of place, everything is perfectly choreographed. Sometimes it’s a little hard to tell where the animatronics end and the real people begin.
I managed to find enjoyment in the experience despite not really being a fan and the rest of the family really enjoyed it.
yes, it is endlessly fascinating, all the detail.
Lew Wolff’s willingness to advise the world that the A’s are looking to get off MLB’s revenue sharing program, and how this would be a benefit to the owners is a blunder. Half of the other teams are on the revenue sharing program, and they are surely not all that enthused about Wolff airing out his ideas about revenue sharing.
Quite often there’s unintentional real info in the offhand remarks of Lew Wolff. His comments explaining that player salary should be 50% of revenues, and also that the A’s benefited financially because the World Series went seven games – you don’t really hear other team owners saying this stuff. Lew Wolff is definitely starting to break ranks.
The A’s with their press release are directly addressing the Yankees – Mets – Phillies – Red Sox voting block, teams looking at down the road at possibly needing to protect their own “territorial rights,†with the A’s pitching the idea of getting off welfare to the richer teams…
Okay, sorry, I posted before reading all the comments – my comments simply echo andeux’s thoughts about the Jankees and other teams possibly keeping in mind the threat of the Rays moving to the Northeast.
Late to the party..
Excellent points. I’d also add — the rest of the half of teams who receive revenue sharing? They ALL, except for Tampa, have relatively new stadiums. Just getting a new stadium is no guarantee of going off the teat.
And, as we’ve mentioned before, without a good tv deal (and being locked in LT for a crappy one), new stadium revenue on its own ain’t gonna move the A’s out of the financial cellar in the ALW.
This franchise is FKed until they get a new owner who knows what he’s doing.
“This franchise is FKed until they get a new owner who knows what he’s doing.”
Hi Monkeyball – I am gonna try to learn how to do the blocked quotes and maybe some photos – apologies in advance if it doesn’t go all that well at first. I will improve!
May I post any/pirated photos from the web – or is that uncool?
==
One thing I’ve noticed about A’s ownership, include Billy, is their real need to present themselves as Jet Setters: claiming a ‘relationship’ with the big English soccer team, trying to spin 8 years of rebuilding as ‘Plan 2015’…
Blockquotes are done by the “b-quote” button above the comment-drafting window. Wanton photo posting is common. Llama is sal. TV deal terms are unknown and speculative; there may be an out clause if the A’s move to San Jose.
A’s TV deal:
My guess would be that with good ratings, the $ will follow quickly, even under current contract.
A’s local TV Deal One More:
What if it is really true that the A’s negotiated for too many years on their local TV deal and are FKed by this until 2024?
Next up, signing Michael Crowley through 2019?
Can it really be that bad?
If there’s no out clause, they’re pretty much fked. A big portion of their new revenue is going to pay off the stadium loans. Add on the possibility of having to pay off the giants and (at worst) pay into revenue sharing or (at best) not getting any revenue sharing.
My hopes and dreams in 15 words