Baseball Commissioner Pete Selig says he's warming to the idea of 
putting two baseball teams out of business.  One of the probable 
victims is the Montreal Expos, who have been a poor team in business 
terms for many years; no surprise there.  But the other team picked 
for extinction is the Florida Marlins.  That's a surprise to me:
the Marlins are one of the most recent expansion teams, beginning 
play in 1993, and they play in one of the hottest growth areas of 
the country, Miami.  And they won a world series in 1997.

From the world series to extinction in only four years.  Wow.

109 responses total.

I hope they don't do this.  They should let the Expos move.  The Expos 
averaged only like 7,000 fans per game up in montreal, the city there 
wont fund a new stadium and they are stuck playing in that awful 1976 
olympic stadium.  It is not a good situation.  Let the Expos move to 
Washington D.C., where there have been ownership groups trying to get a 
new team for years and where there is an empty stadium (RFK stadium) 
where they could play until a new field is built out in the Virginia 
suburbs.

The Marlins have bad ownership.  Miami is a great market and they won a 
world title a few years back.  It is not fair to the fans there to take 
away their team just a few years after they got it.  

Also the big market teams that make all the money should engage in 
profit sharing.  The Yankees made $100 million this year because of 
local tv rights.  Montreal barely made $20 million and didnt meet their 
$26 million payroll.  They lost money.  There needs to be profit 
sharing if these small market teams are to survive.

Re #1: "The city won't fund a new stadium."  I've always wondered why 
professional sports that, overall, make millions upon millions of 
dollars a year expect tax payers to foot the bill for their places of 
business.

re#2 - because cities that dont fund new stadiums end up losing their 
ball clubs like montreal is going to do. it kind of sucks that taxpayers 
should subsidize a business like that but having a baseball club play in 
one's town can sometimes have advantages that exceed the costs to the 
municipality that is paying for the stadium. 

This is probably a good a place as any to point to this item from 
Toronto's Globe & Mail newspaper:
 
(Um, the URL is not repostable; try searching for "United Center"
at their site...)

Anyway, the essay says that today's major league sports teams rest 
on two economic pillars: the willingness of corporations to 
shell out big money for things like stadium naming rights, 
season tickets, luxury suites, and TV advertising; and the 
willingness of governments to build stadiums and arenas.  
And in the aftermath of September 11, it seems most 
likely that both of those pillars will sag tremendously if not 
collapse.  

There is a movement afloat here in NYC to replace Yankee Stadium with
a new stadium.  Yankee stadium is a baseball cathedral, but it is aging
and doesnt have all those nice things like luxury suites.  Steinbrenner
wants it torn down and replaced.  The Yankees made $100 million last
year from huge tv rights fees and licensing fees.  Yet the plan that
Steinbrenner and Mayor Guiliani have cooked up would have the taxpayers
funding the new stadium.  It has become an issue in the mayor's race.

They'll cut funding for public services to pay the city's debts arising
from the WTC towers collapse and recovery effort (all those firefighters and
construction folks down at zero working double time overtime adds up!), but
we'll still pay for the Yankees new field?  Talk about misplaced
priorities.  Mayor Guiliani is trying to rush this deal through before he
leaves office in January, because his likely successor- Mark Green the 
Democratic Public Advocate-- is staunchly opposed to it.

I know. I was really bummed about the Tigers moving out of Tiger stadium 
into the brand new Comerica Park. Blech. No more Tiger baseball for me. 
I drive to Toledo for the Mudhens and like them enough to forgive them 
having a new downtown ball park. 

Actually, I'd be happy to see major league baseball lose a few teams. 
Many of the players in the majors today are not really "major league" 
talent. They're just up in the majors because there aren't enough good 
players to go around. 

This also leads to teams rushing players into the big leagues to the 
detriment of the player's development. I think Brandon Inge is a good 
example of this.

The other problem with the Montreal team, and with a lot of hockey teams, as
I understand it, is the weakness of the Canadian dollar over the past few
years.  Canadian teams get their revenue in Canadian dollars but have to
compete for players with American teams whose revenue comes in in American
dollars.

I hope a way can be found to move the Expos to Washington, too.  Washington
has badly wanted a baseball team ever since the second incarnation of the
Senators left in (I believe) 1972.

It does seem, as Richard said, that the split between the big market teams
and the small market teams is the real division in baseball.  The Yankees
have won 3 (possibly to become 4) championships in a row, and well they
ought, since they can afford to buy as much talent as they can find.  I
don't know enough about the economics of the situation to know if
profit-sharing is a good idea, but I wish something would change.

BTW the media just *love* it when the big-market teams win, so they won't be
any help.

Dan slipped in.

#2, #3> Except for the bit about people not being killed, what is the
difference in justification between that and similar nonsense during the Roman
Empire? We've got it into our heads that "world class city" means "has lots
of sports teams."

This item is linked from autum 2001 agora to the sports conference.

Montreal also isnt a baseball town.  It is a hockey town.  There are
some places where certain sports just dont get over.  Like football
in L.A., both NFL teams moved away, its not a football town.

And the NBA hasnt worked in Vancouver either.  Vancouver isnt a
basketball town.

I agree with Richard.  Drawing an average of 7000 fans per game does 
show a lack of interest in Montreal for baseball.  Folding the Expos 
will do very little harm to major league baseball.

The Expos didn't even get many fans when they were contending for the 
National League pennant, which I think was in the strike-shortened 1994 
season.  They just aren't a viable team.

Several things can be done to make a team viable.  The team can invest 
it's money into scouting and it's minor leagues.  Montreal did this a 
decade ago, and produced some extremely attractive players, such as 
Pedro Martinez.  These guys won some games, but as soon as they were 
recognized as stars, they bolted for higher-paying clubs.  Cleveland 
built itself into a winner by building some players in it's farm 
system, and then signing them to long-term contracts when they were 
young.

A highly motivated owner can purchase the team and pump in lots of 
money.  This is less common than it used to be, as major league 
baseball is a darned expensive hobby, no matter who the owner is.  It's 
*much* more expensive than it used to be.  The Florida Marlins took 
their expansion team to the World Series because the owner, Wayne 
Huizenga, bought a great group of players.  Then he lost interest and 
broke the team up, and then sold it.  They're now on the right track 
for a small-market team, with a good farm system.

A really smart owner can invest even limited money where it really can 
count, in a good coach and a good management team.  Oakland is a small 
market team; they had the 2nd lowest salary in the majors this year, 
next to Montreal.  But they made the playoffs each of the last two 
years.  Their general manager, Billy Beane, recognizes talent very 
well.  Oakland's core talent won't last for long if they can't pay them 
a lot, but for right now they're an impressive group.

But there are no indications Montreal has the capability to do any of 
these things.  And as I said earlier, there's no reason to believe the 
fans of the Expos would support their team, even if it was a winner.

The answer is to attend minor-league teams (if possible in your area!).  My
favorite baseball experiencen was the Toledo Mudhens, and now Lansing has a
team as well (the Lugnuts).

We have the Royals (AAA farm team to Kansas City) here in Omaha.

Formerly the Golden Spikes (yeeuck)
Before that... the Royals.

Very fun to attend.

        Detroit's new home of the Tigers is one of the few stadium
build without a massive amount of city or state dollars.  Is this
true?

Re #15: Did they wear golden spikes on their shoes?
Re #13: Where did the TIgers place on the list of the lowest payed teams?

Another discouraging thing about the way major league baseball is 
currently set up is that the so-called "minor market" teams are really 
acting as farm teams for the bigger boys. Teams like Montreal and 
Kansas City (I think Detroit is kind of on the fence here) find and 
develop talent only to have them jump to a "major market" team as soon 
as they are eligible for free agency. 

I'm not sure it will ever be possible for those teams to accumulate 
enough talent to actually contend for a title. And if you never have 
the hope of contending, what's the point? Why should fans go to games 
in which the home team gets regularly creamed?

Well, Cubs fans have made a virtue out of losing, somehow.  But it's true
that the Cubs have had plenty of good seasons, even if they haven't won any
world series since 1909.  So I basically agree.

In any baseball league, it's a mathematical certainty that one of the teams
is going to finish last.

  (it isn't possible for two or more teams to finish last?)  :-p

No, not to my knowledge. They don't allow tie-games; that's what extra innings
are all about. Well, maybe I'll amend that to "at least one team".

Games may not be tied, but overall records can easily be.  So, yeah,
you could easily have multiple teams finish last.

Detroit is a very good sports town, and specifically a very good 
baseball town.  It is definitely possible to have a contender in 
Detroit.

I'm not sure where they placed on the total salary list (a list which 
varies through the season anyway, as teams make trades and players get 
injured); probably somewhat below the average.  They cut salary from 
last year.  That was because Tom Ilitch had some sticker shock over the 
price of Comerica Park.  Ilitch personally paid a *lot* more for the 
ballpark than most owners; I think he might have paid more than any 
other owner ever has.

The Tigers have been in a downward spiral for 15 years; they traded 
some great prospects (example" John Smoltz) to take a shot at winning 
it all in 1987, then tried to buy a contender in the early 1990's, when 
for a couple of years they had the highest salary in baseball, then 
around the time Tom Monaghan bought the team, they decided they had to 
build from the ground up and discovered they had almost no quality 
prospects in their whole minor league system.

It's been an uphill struggle to build a good farm system.  Partially 
this requires luck; they've had some good prospects who didn't pan out 
or who got injured.  Partly it requires talent recognition; the Tigers 
have not had many really good drafts.  It takes about 4 years to take 
a "normal" 1st or 2nd round draft choice and make him into a major 
league player, assuming normal luck and normal ability to draft 1st and 
2nd rounders.

Players haven't come up through the minors and bolted from the Tigers; 
they have never made it up through the minors, gotten injured, or been 
traded for guys who never made it as major leaguers.  Other than Travis 
Fryman, who was a star 3B for the Tigers and then just wasn't re-
signed, there haven't been any impact major leaguers who left the 
Tigers for free agent opportunities.

The Tigers are in a tough spot now, and there's little for them to do 
but to place blame.  They have big expenses from Comerica Park, and 
declining expectations (and support) from their fans.  Their farm 
system now seems more promising than it has in years, but honestly, 
that's not saying a lot.

If they spend a lot of money on players and put together a winning 
team, I am confident they could fill the ballpark.  But without the 
support of the fan base, they don't feel they have the money to spend.  
Without the contender, the fan base doesn't feel compelled to go to the 
ballpark.

I'd go to games if they returned to the old Tiger Stadium.

Did you go to games before they moved to Comerica Park?  How many per 
year?

I've gone to maybe a dozen games at Comerica Park now, and I think it's 
fine.  I'd still have preferred they kept Tiger Stadium, but they 
didn't do that.

I've been to 3 games at Comerica Park, and it really is a very nice place to
see a game.  You should try it, Larry - it's much more rewarding to see a
good game than hold a grudge.  (Of course, there weren't too many good gams
for the Tigers this past season...)

I agree with Mark. 

I grew up going to Tiger Stadium, and was sorry to see them move, but 
the new park is really nice. It's a double shame that the team sucks so 
badly. As jep says, if the team was even halfway decent, the fans would 
be thronging to the stadium.

jep's analysis in resp:24 is essentially what I believe.  
After producing the fabulous crop of players which won the world series
in 1984 and won the division in 1987 -- Jack Morris, Alan Trammell, 
Lou Whitaker, Lance Parrish, Kirk Gibson, probably a few more, almost
all home-grown by the Tigers farm system -- the wheels fell off.
Beyond John Smoltz and Travis Fryman, I can't think of any high-impact
players produced by the Tigers farm system in the last 15 years.
 
So what the heck happened?  How did the Tigers go from producing most 
of a home-grown World Series champion in the early 1980s, to the 
subsequent decade-and-a-half of farm system futility?

re #29: If you'll remember, 1984 was the year Tom Monaghan bought the 
team.  I don't remember what year he sold it; maybe 1994?

Sometimes, anyway, it seems he expected 1984 was a normal year; just buy 
the team and get a 35-5 start and a World Series championship.  Monaghan 
did buy some other players that year and in following years.  John 
Smoltz went to Atlanta in 1987 in exchange for Doyle Alexander.  Behind 
Alexander, who won something like 13 straight games, the Tigers made it 
to the playoffs that year.

But Monaghan had little interest in building the organization from the 
minors.  Whenever Bo Schembechler became the president of the Tigers, he 
spotted that almost immediately.  He went to work on upgrading the farm 
system and the facilities of the farm system.  I don't know if he ever 
did anything else for the team.

He was not president for long; Monaghan lost interest in baseball (and 
his other hobbies, such as collecting cars) and sold the team, and Bo 
was canned.

1984 for the Tigers was not a normal year for a baseball team, though.  
That team was built by then, and was ready to win.  It seems to me the 
Tigers have never built a team again.  They rode Trammell, Whitaker and 
Morris as long as they could, and have been scratching their heads since 
then about where those guys went.  They've bought stars, such as 
pitchers Mike Moore and Tim Belcher (early 1990's), or traded for them 
as they did a couple of years ago with Juan Gonzalez.  But they've 
seemed to expect all they need is to add star power.

People seem to add "like the Yankees" to your sentence when you talk 
about buying star players.  But you have to admire the Yankees; they 
didn't just throw money at players, they threw their money wisely.  The 
Tigers have had many occurrances of big-name players who didn't "work 
out", but that hasn't very often happened to the Yankees.  They do pay a 
lot and get a lot of big names, but they get big names who can (and do) 
contribute to their ballclub.

I don't know exactly what they need to do, but the Tigers need to learn 
to be more like the Yankees.  Make the investments, but make them a 
little more wisely.

I had completely forgotten that 1984 was the year Monaghan purchased the 
club.  That has to be it.  I had figured that Bo had been a bust in 
working on young player development for the Tigers, but you're saying
that he never had the time to get the job done, correct?

My guess, in response to #29, was that it was the year Monaghan bought 
the team. Fetzer and Campbell were real "baseball guys." Monaghan 
bought them as a feather in his cap.

There was a lot of hope when Illich bought the team. A lot was made of 
how he had played in the Tigers farm system at one point. 
Unfortunately, he seems more interested in the Wings than the Tigers.

jep's right, too about the Yankees. They have a killer combination of a 
strong farm system and enough money to get the players they need to 
fill in the gaps.

re #31: I don't know if Bo had either the ability or the time to turn 
around the Tiger's farm system.  I remember him focusing on 
facilities.  Certainly that must be part of the equation.  I have no 
idea what kind of handle he had on finding the right people to pick 
coaches, trainers and scouts.

re #32: A great farm system is a result of wisely spent money.  You get 
great prospects, but then you have to develop them into great players.  
The Yankees brought Derek Jeter and Mariano Rivera through their farm 
system; they're both not just the best at their positions, but among 
the best in history.  That's no accident.  It takes good development 
staff and also facilities.  It takes smart staff and coaches.  Also, it 
takes the ability to recognize the right direction as an organization, 
and the commitment to stick with it.  George Steinbrenner is a pain for 
the rest of baseball, but for his team, he's a great owner.  Not just 
rich, but smart and committed.

Re 26.  Yes, I went to games at Tiger Stadium.  Maybe three or four, in
the three years I lived in Detroit.  Only once since then.  So, yeah, my
support is no great loss to the organization.

The current plan being worked on by the commissioner's office includes 
the elimination of two teams.  But what two teams is subject to debate.
The owners of Montreal and Florida have indicated willingness to trade 
for or take over other franchises in markets with more favorable 
economic conditions.

Could always eliminate the Tigers and let the Tigers ownership take 
over the Marlins in Miami (if they're willing to pay for a new stadium 
down there)  You put the Tigers players in a dispersal draft, and move 
the Montreal franchise to Detroit where they'd assume the Tigers name.  
The current Montreal ownership would surely pay more for top players if 
they had the Detroit market instead of Montreal.

This takes care of unhappy ownership situations in montreal, florida 
and detroit, while ultimately only eliminating montreal.

That's just stupid. Illich is a Detroit guy, and if the Tigers aren't 
here, there's no reason for him to be an owner.

World Series game 4:  I felt bad for the Diamondback's relief pitcher 
Kim, who struck out the side in the 8th inning, only to give up a tie
in the ninth and eventually the winning run.
 
Kim is a "submarine" pitcher; I don't recall seeing that style in a 
prominent game since Dan Quisenberry was pitching against the Tigers
in the 1980s.  Somebody (jep?) please write about the tactical reasons
and the history of underhanded pitching?

And it's the 12th inning of game 5.  2-all, 1 out, with New York at bat.
Last I looked, it was 2-0 in the seventh.

And now it's over: 2-3 Yankees.

I don't care who wins the Series, but it's fun to watch come-from-behind wins.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss