Last week we talked a bit about contraction, this week let’s talk about relocation. At the moment, let’s assume none of the teams are going to get contracted. This is likely a safe assumption. In 2005, Forbes values the cheapest major league franchise, the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, at $176 million. The median value rests at a comfortable $310 million. That’s a lot of money to just up and ignore. Major League baseball will lose the long term revenue of these teams eventually turning it around and being good, and they will take a bad PR hit when they up and remove a team. It’s publicity they don’t want, or need, for a sport just finally coming completely out of the hole it dug for itself in 1994.
That being said, for each of the cities that don’t really want a baseball team, there’s plenty of places waiting with open arms. For sake of argument, I’m working under the assumption that the Marlins will be moving within the next couple of years. For the second sake of argument, I’m assuming the Athletics will be moving in the next couple of years.
Speaking to Editor Matt, we were able to put together a list of ten cities I then ranked from 1 to 10. I included “Latin America” as a city because all the arguments against one city in Latin America applies to all of them. They all share the same basic problems and benefits. I’ll take them one at a time starting from the least likely to the most likely. Let’s call the first five the “No Chance In Hell” cities.
Number 10: Latin America. Absolutely No Chance In Hell
Yes, I do understand that there are arguments for putting a team in Latin America. When they were discussing about moving the Expos, there was talk of moving them permanently to San Juan or Mexico. The people there will support the team. 25% of major league players are from Latin America. One single team will get multinational support by likely EVERY nation in Central America, South America, and the Caribbean. I understand that the merchandising would be huge, with x million Americans (legal and otherwise) buying the Latin American Team’s jerseys and hats just because they’re from Latin America. There’s even an argument the merchandising might offset the money they’ll lose from having a team in Latin America.
But that’s really what it comes down to, the stadium. Look, I’m not saying I don’t think Latin America deserves a team, not at all, but you’re not going to convince an owner to drop a team in an area of the world where they are forced to charged 1930s prices for tickets. You’re talking about an area of the world where a lot of your fanbase lives below the poverty line. Even if you were to put a team in San Juan, where they at least have to be paid the federal minimum wage, you’re still not going to be selling many $300 seats and $8.75 beers. Nearly anywhere in the states, he can charge five to ten times that amount. This is fine if major league baseball itself wants to own the team and lose money every year, but no owner is going to agree to put a team in Latin America. Yet.
Number 9: Boston. If Hell Freezes Over
I don’t really know where I heard this rumor, but there has been talk of putting a National League team in Boston. Again, just like Latin America, there are plenty of arguments for this. Boston was able, in the past, to support two baseball teams. The Braves used to play there and the stadium is even still standing. It’s in the top ten media markets in the country. As of 2003 it was the 11th most populous city (Source, ain’t I cool). It’s not like having an American League and a National League team in the same city is unprecedented. (Although, granted, Chicago is the smallest of these cities with more than double the population of Boston).
Here’s the thing. In every city that has two teams, there’s THE team and the OTHER team. The OTHER team never quite gets the acceptance as THE team. The Cubs haven’t won a World Series title in 98 years, the White Sox won one last year… the Cubs are still the more beloved team. In most cases, you could argue the fact that one team’s been in the city longer. While the Cubs have, in fact, been in the city longer, both have been in the city long enough to be classified as “a long fuggin time.” Eric S could probably discuss this phenomenon with more authority than me, but the same thing happens in Los Angeles. The Angels have had incredible success in the last few years, but they’re still the OTHER team. The Yankees managed to stop being the OTHER team, but only because the Dodgers left the city. Then the Mets were created and they became the OTHER team. Even this year, as the Mets eclipse the Yankees (so far) the Mets remain that OTHER team in New York.
In Boston, where the fans are so rabid about the Red Sox, I don’t know if a second baseball team would even stand a chance. As much as I love the city of Boston, they’re not big on change. The city’s history in this regard is well documented with respect to baseball, but we’re talking about a city that still runs its subway system above ground and has the trains stop at traffic lights. I just don’t think an owner would want to put a team in the same city as the most insane fanbase this side of Philadelphia. Boston would not easily accept a new baseball team, and everyone involved likely knows it.
Of course, Time Warner is officially putting the $382 million dollar Braves on the market. Who knows if some buyer decides they really SHOULD be the Sawks’ cross-town rivals.
Number 8: Norfolk, VA. Where?
Norfolk: Three years ago, the DC Metro area (and no, I’m not really considering Norfolk as part of the DC Metro area, but I could as people consider New Jersey Part of New York) had a single baseball team. Two years ago, despite vehement protests from that team’s owner, major league baseball put a team in Washington DC. Now, we want to consider putting a third team relatively close to these two teams. I like the Virginia Beach area of the country. It’s very nice. Is it big enough to host a baseball team and get a decent sized crowd 81 times per year with two teams close by? I don’t think so.
Norfolk is a relatively small media market. As much as a team may do well placed in Virginia, the area isn’t big enough to support a team. As an owner, you’re probably not going to put a team in an area that probably can’t support it even without competition and, in this case, you’re putting it in an area where it has two teams in competition… including one that hasn’t even lost the new car smell yet. I’m placing it at number 8 just because it’s more likely than Boston or Latin America, but not by much.
Number 7: Charlotte, NC. Maybe in 20 years
I placed Charlotte above Norfolk because it’s 400 miles away from the DC Metro area. Charlotte is one of these sexy places where everyone thinks about putting a team because of the rate at which the area is growing, but in Charlotte there are all the same problems that exist in Norfolk, plus a few more. First, they already have two professional sports teams. Granted, the Panthers don’t really have attendance problems, but the NFL doesn’t have attendance problems in general. Football teams have eight to eleven home games each season, this is why you can pretty much drop a football stadium in the middle of a desert and sell out every game (supply… meet demand). A baseball team takes a little more work because of the sheer volume of games. There aren’t bobblehead or free cap days at football games.
Then there are the Bobcats. The NBA thought enough of Charlotte to give them a new team after the Hornets moved. There were games this season where the Bobcats only drew 9,000 people. The team is two years old. When the shine wears off their new baseball team (in July, if the ‘cats are any indication) will a baseball team suffer the same fate? Probably.
There’s no way an owner is going to put their team in a place where the other pro-sports team is drawing four figures. The area is not ready for a baseball team. Charlotte’s mayor has even gone on the record saying he doesn’t believe his city can support a third franchise. If there’s even a hint of doubt, no owner is going to put his team there. Either of the two teams moving there lands them in a place where they have the same problems they have now; low attendance and lack of government support. Not happening.
Number Six: San Antonio, TX. Almost, but not quite
As of last week, San Antonio has given the Marlins a May 15th deadline to give them a yea or nay. This is the equivalent of taking themselves out of the running. The Marlins are going to explore all options before making a decision. They’re not going to rush headlong into San Antonio before giving other cities rest a chance to come across with offers. They’d also be stupid to move San Antonio. San Antonio is going to end up offering either team the stadium they want. They will be able to point to the Spurs for attendance. They will also point out that Austin is only about 80 miles away and they would really be a team for both cities to enjoy.
If you combine the populations of Austin and San Antonio, they’re not even half as big as Houston. Here is the thing to remember about Texas: it’s an enormous desert with some large population centers. The NFL also seems hell-bent on putting a team there. San Antonio is probably a very nice city, but if you want me to buy the fact it can carry 3 professional sports franchises with a population of less than two million, I’ll tell you you’re wrong.
(Ed Note: according to most San Antonio news outlets, the Marlins deal looks pretty close to dead. They also note South Florida is in the process of a massive effort to keep the Marlins in the state.)
This wraps up the No Chance In Hell Cities. The previous five cities don’t offer enough for a team to consider moving there. On Wednesday, we’ll talk about the five cities that actually have a chance in hell.
Quick Hits
- Brad Lidge hasn’t been right since Pujols beat him with a walk-off in the playoffs last year. He’s pitching like his confidence is gone and that’s bad for a closer. Most folks argued he’d be able to shake the loss off (like a closer has to) but it doesn’t appear to have happened yet.
- How good are Lakers when Kobe plays “point guard” instead of “only guy on the floor?” The Lakers team that played the Suns on Friday night could actually prove me wrong and kill my championship pick in the first round. Talk about LA drama with a Clippers/Lakers second round
- If you look up “Melt down” in the dictionary, you might see a Rangers logo. After flirting with winning the division all year, they came back from the Olympic Break with a 6-10 March, a 3-5 April regular season, and a sweep in the playoffs. Tough to close the season on 9 straight loses… very Mets-esque.
- Mets Fans: slow down with writing off the Braves. You beat them this weekend… congratulations. You’re still 8-100000 at Turner field. It’s also April. The last time the Braves opened at 11-15, they won 101 games. I’m not saying you can’t be happy, just stop taunting the dynamite Yankees.
- That being said: Billy Wagner coming in and facing Chipper Jones, Andrew Jones, and Jeff Francouer in a 1-0 situation will hopefully silence the people that question his ability as a closer. Pay that man his money.
- The K-Mart hissy fit is probably going to be big news in the coming week. Oddly, in the playoff games he’s skipped, the Nuggets have posted a better record. Go figure. According to Brent Mussburger during the game, the Nuggets are 30-9 over the last 2 years with K-Mart out of the lineup. Denver is probably on the phone with Isiah Thomas as you read this to get the Knicks’ draft picks through 2010 for K-Mart and cash.
In Conclusion
I was originally going to do this whole list as a single top ten list, but I got up to four pages after the first five and decided to break it up into two parts. Check back on Wednesday for the five places they might move a franchise or two.
