PDA

View Full Version : An American League team looking at Las Vegas?


PKalltheway
08-20-2010, 12:42 AM
This is interesting. I'm guessing that the A's are the mystery team.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/aug/19/mayor-american-league-baseball-team-looking-las-ve/

Nellie_Fox
08-20-2010, 12:50 AM
I've always heard that MLB opposed Vegas because of the sports gambling. I suppose things can change. It'll be interesting to watch.

Fenway
08-20-2010, 06:48 AM
I've always heard that MLB opposed Vegas because of the sports gambling. I suppose things can change. It'll be interesting to watch.

Casinos advertising in many parks - and lottery tickets now...MLB doesn't care

http://www.masslottery.com/games/instant/10-dollar/Red-Sox-45-2010_odds.html

johnnyg83
08-20-2010, 07:36 AM
A three-day weekend of WhiteSox, gambling and gambling sounds like a better time than Oakland.

doublem23
08-20-2010, 07:43 AM
A three-day weekend of WhiteSox, gambling and gambling sounds like a better time than Oakland.

:yup:

If this goes down, I would petition to move the Sox back to the Western Division.

This is interesting. I'm guessing that the A's are the mystery team.

If it's not the A's, it's the Rays.

Fenway
08-20-2010, 08:08 AM
The late Doug Pappas said that MLB looks at the potential television market when deciding what is the best option.

Base population of the core city is secondary to building a strong regional cable network AND the other thing they look at is trying to avoid hurting another team.

http://www.tvb.org/rcentral/markettrack/us_hh_by_dma.asp

The largest TV market without a team is #19 ORLANDO but #14 TAMPA is only 80 miles away and gives the Rays a very nice market. In fact the Rays are sniffing at relocating to Lakeland which would be similar to what the A's wanted to do with Fremont. (40 miles from both Tampa and Orlando)

Next market is #20 SACRAMENTO but it adjoins the East Bay of SF

Next is #22 PORTLAND but again putting a team there would hurt #13 SEATTLE

However at #24 CHARLOTTE you hit paydirt. To the east you can include #46 GREENSBORO and #26 RALEIGH - to the south you have surprisingly #36 GREENVILLE (SC) before you start cutting into #8 ATLANTA.

LAS VEGAS is #46 by itself with nothing but desert around it.

So to build a TV network, the Carolina's are the best market - plus Charlotte has a major corporate presence (Bank of America HQ) and by putting a team there you don't hurt an existing franchise.

doublem23
08-20-2010, 08:23 AM
The late Doug Pappas said that MLB looks at the potential television market when deciding what is the best option.

Base population of the core city is secondary to building a strong regional cable network AND the other thing they look at is trying to avoid hurting another team.

http://www.tvb.org/rcentral/markettrack/us_hh_by_dma.asp

The largest TV market without a team is #19 ORLANDO but #14 TAMPA is only 80 miles away and gives the Rays a very nice market. In fact the Rays are sniffing at relocating to Lakeland which would be similar to what the A's wanted to do with Fremont. (40 miles from both Tampa and Orlando)

Next market is #20 SACRAMENTO but it adjoins the East Bay of SF

Next is #22 PORTLAND but again putting a team there would hurt #13 SEATTLE

However at #24 CHARLOTTE you hit paydirt. To the east you can include #46 GREENSBORO and #26 RALEIGH - to the south you have surprisingly #36 GREENVILLE (SC) before you start cutting into #8 ATLANTA.

LAS VEGAS is #46 by itself with nothing but desert around it.

So to build a TV network, the Carolina's are the best market - plus Charlotte has a major corporate presence (Bank of America HQ) and by putting a team there you don't hurt an existing franchise.

I can't imagine any AL team would willingly move to the Eastern Division, so bye bye Charlotte.

Fenway
08-20-2010, 08:33 AM
I can't imagine any AL team would willingly move to the Eastern Division, so bye bye Charlotte.

Charlotte is almost due south of Cleveland so you could move it to the Central and then KC to the west which would give the Rangers a few more TV games in Central Time Zone.

johnnyg83
08-20-2010, 10:31 AM
charlotte is almost due south of cleveland so you could move it to the central and then kc to the west which would give the rangers a few more tv games in central time zone.

nooooooo!!!!

Hitmen77
08-20-2010, 11:05 AM
The late Doug Pappas said that MLB looks at the potential television market when deciding what is the best option.

Base population of the core city is secondary to building a strong regional cable network AND the other thing they look at is trying to avoid hurting another team.

http://www.tvb.org/rcentral/markettrack/us_hh_by_dma.asp

The largest TV market without a team is #19 ORLANDO but #14 TAMPA is only 80 miles away and gives the Rays a very nice market. In fact the Rays are sniffing at relocating to Lakeland which would be similar to what the A's wanted to do with Fremont. (40 miles from both Tampa and Orlando)

Next market is #20 SACRAMENTO but it adjoins the East Bay of SF

Next is #22 PORTLAND but again putting a team there would hurt #13 SEATTLE

However at #24 CHARLOTTE you hit paydirt. To the east you can include #46 GREENSBORO and #26 RALEIGH - to the south you have surprisingly #36 GREENVILLE (SC) before you start cutting into #8 ATLANTA.

LAS VEGAS is #46 by itself with nothing but desert around it.

So to build a TV network, the Carolina's are the best market - plus Charlotte has a major corporate presence (Bank of America HQ) and by putting a team there you don't hurt an existing franchise.

This is why I have my doubts about how serious a team is about moving to Vegas. People seem to get fixated on the "fastest growing city" stat. You can be one of the fastest growing cities and still not be big enough to support MLB.

Remember, MLB is probably the tough sport for a metro area to support. You have 81 games to sell tickets for - many on consecutive work nights/school night and teams that don't average at least 25,000 per game are seen as not being able to keep up with other teams economically. The NBA and NHL have half as many games and arenas that have a seating capacity that is about half that of MLB ballparks. The NFL has only 8 regular season games (almost all on weekends) to sell tickets to.

I think the A's are probably sniffing around to places like Vegas because they're desperate to get some sort of stadium deal done in Northern California and they're looking for some leverage.

If it's not the A's, it's the Rays.

I can't think of any other AL team who would even possibly be looking to move. Would the Blue Jays consider moving? They don't seem to have much fan support and they're stuck in a fake grass/multipurpose stadium.

Charlotte is almost due south of Cleveland so you could move it to the Central and then KC to the west which would give the Rangers a few more TV games in Central Time Zone.

Would KC have to approve that move? The Royals are one of the most struggling teams in the AL as far as drawing fans. I can't imagine that MLB would kick them while they're down and shove them over to a west coast division.

Lip Man 1
08-20-2010, 11:19 AM
Weren't the A's also snooping around Montreal?

I thought the issue with the Rays was that they have a long term lease with the stadium and I remember reading the Governor made a statement that if the Rays even thought about breaking it, he'd take them to court.

Lip

downstairs
08-20-2010, 11:35 AM
Casinos advertising in many parks - and lottery tickets now...MLB doesn't care

http://www.masslottery.com/games/instant/10-dollar/Red-Sox-45-2010_odds.html

The lottery and the kind of gambling at non-Vegas casinos are very, very different than sports gambling (legal only in Vegas.)

Smokey Burg
08-20-2010, 12:02 PM
I imagine that if anybody even remotely associated with MLB suggested a possible franchise in Las Vegas, the moldering remains of Kennesaw Landis would spontaneously combust into a conflagaration so immense that it would consume the Earth.

Coops4Aces
08-20-2010, 12:52 PM
So can someone run past me why a sports team in Vegas is bad from a gambling perspective? Do they think athletes will rack up huge gambling debts and then have to fix games to pay off the debt?

LoveYourSuit
08-20-2010, 01:06 PM
Baseball in Vegas would be awesome!

You know you can sell road trip packages easily because it's one of the biggest vacation destinations in the US. And people go to Vegas for 3-4 days, that's how long a series goes for.

Don't know how big of a homefield advantage it would be for that team, but if the revenue is there, go for it. A's revenue has to be one of the worst in all of baseball.

doublem23
08-20-2010, 01:09 PM
I can't think of any other AL team who would even possibly be looking to move. Would the Blue Jays consider moving? They don't seem to have much fan support and they're stuck in a fake grass/multipurpose stadium.

I thought about the Jays, too, but I don't know if being Canada's only team in such a huge city Toronto is worth leaving. I'd assume they're on TV's all across the Great North, not like the A's and Rays who have almost 0 draw outside their own hometowns.

downstairs
08-20-2010, 01:12 PM
So can someone run past me why a sports team in Vegas is bad from a gambling perspective? Do they think athletes will rack up huge gambling debts and then have to fix games to pay off the debt?

Well for starters there's pure perception. Even if nothing shady happens, Vegas just reeks of problems. The mere hint of something fishy and the 24/7 news cycle will light up.

Also, a baseball team needs its local businesses. Needs them for advertising, suites, events, etc. The team will be very, very close with local businesses. That's fine for a grocery store or car dealership. But from a businesses that may actually MAKE money from the team losing at times? That could be an issue.

I don't know of any Vegas casino that sponsors a baseball team in any way. It could be against MLB rules.

If this team can't get buddy-buddy with casinos- what businesses are left?

downstairs
08-20-2010, 01:20 PM
Charlotte is almost due south of Cleveland so you could move it to the Central and then KC to the west which would give the Rangers a few more TV games in Central Time Zone.

If the A's moved there, someone would have to move to the West from the Central, and someone would have to move to the Central from the East to properly fill the void of the A's moving themselves.

Your scenario seems right- KC is the westmost Central Division city.

LoveYourSuit
08-20-2010, 02:20 PM
Can they move the Twins to the west, please?

Nellie_Fox
08-20-2010, 02:30 PM
Casinos advertising in many parks - and lottery tickets now...MLB doesn't care

http://www.masslottery.com/games/instant/10-dollar/Red-Sox-45-2010_odds.htmlNote that I said SPORTS gambling. See the next post. That was my point.

The lottery and the kind of gambling at non-Vegas casinos are very, very different than sports gambling (legal only in Vegas.)

Medford Bobby
08-20-2010, 05:18 PM
First there must be apologies to Willy Mays and to the family of Mickey Mantle then MLB can move into Las Vegas.:o:

Coops4Aces
08-20-2010, 05:19 PM
First there must be apologies to Willy Mays and to the family of Mickey Mantle then MLB can move into Las Vegas.:o:

Please explain.

WhiteSox5187
08-20-2010, 05:24 PM
Please explain.

They were both banned by a commissioner (Bowie Kuhn maybe, I forget which one for certain) for working for a casino. They had to give up their positions with the Mets and Yankees (which were just honorary positions).

Fenway
08-20-2010, 05:43 PM
Turns out Charlotte does have a plan to modify Bank of America Stadium short term while a park is built.

Charlotte is a so-so AAA market but is hurt by the stadium actually being in South Carolina.

If you look at the region it is by far the best fit to build a strong regional base and not hurt anybody else. There are a lot of cable TV homes in the Carolinas.

Daver
08-20-2010, 05:58 PM
I would bet that snow will be plowed in hell before an MLB team ever calls Las Vegas home.

Red Barchetta
08-20-2010, 06:12 PM
I would bet that snow will be plowed in hell before an MLB team ever calls Las Vegas home.

I agree. Vegas was hit hard during this recession. Simple math when people don't have disposable income. I can't imagine Vegas having enough support to consistenly draw solid attendance. Plus, since it will the summer in a desert, I'm sure some kind of roof will be needed, although it does cool down at night.

Coops4Aces
08-20-2010, 06:18 PM
I agree. Vegas was hit hard during this recession. Simple math when people don't have disposable income. I can't imagine Vegas having enough support to consistenly draw solid attendance. Plus, since it will the summer in a desert, I'm sure some kind of roof will be needed, although it does cool down at night.

No roof is needed IMO. Went to Vegas a few week ago, it was nicer when I got on the plane in Vegas at 7pm than it was in Chicago when I got off at midnight-ish. Humidity is the killer.

Fenway
08-20-2010, 06:36 PM
No roof is needed IMO. Went to Vegas a few week ago, it was nicer when I got on the plane in Vegas at 7pm than it was in Chicago when I got off at midnight-ish. Humidity is the killer.

The numbers in Vegas just don't add up. There is NO secondary market outside of Reno.

As I mentioned earlier every other market that has a large core would hurt another MLB team if somebody moved in.

Portland - Seattle
San Antonio - Rangers and Astros
Indy - Cincinnati
Columbus - Indians-Reds

Charlotte would dent the Braves a little but their TV market is so big it would have little impact.

Then you have Montreal.

TDog
08-20-2010, 08:42 PM
Baseball won't approve a major league team moving to Las Vegas as long as betting on baseball is legal in Las Vegas.

Las Vegas would be probably the worst place to relocate a major league team if only because of the weather.

ewokpelts
08-21-2010, 12:20 AM
Casinos advertising in many parks - and lottery tickets now...MLB doesn't care

http://www.masslottery.com/games/instant/10-dollar/Red-Sox-45-2010_odds.html

if vegas kills the mlb sportsbook(which they do temporarily when mlb teams play at cashman field, and also duing the 2007 nba all star game) then i see this as a major possibility.

sides, the casinos will buy the premium seating.

ewokpelts
08-21-2010, 12:21 AM
Baseball won't approve a major league team moving to Las Vegas as long as betting on baseball is legal in Las Vegas.

Las Vegas would be probably the worst place to relocate a major league team if only because of the weather.retractable roof stadium, just like in arizona and planet houston

ewokpelts
08-21-2010, 12:22 AM
I thought about the Jays, too, but I don't know if being Canada's only team in such a huge city Toronto is worth leaving. I'd assume they're on TV's all across the Great North, not like the A's and Rays who have almost 0 draw outside their own hometowns.the black jays control all of canada's tv/internet rights.

also, the jays are owned by Rogers Communications. And so is the former Skydome. So I doubt the Jays will be moving unless they get sold.

ewokpelts
08-21-2010, 12:32 AM
Interesting nugget from the Vegas Mayor:

"So, folks, if we get ourselves a team here, if it's not the Yankees or White Sox or the Red Sox, all of those folks will be able to visit us from those cities and fill the stadium."

It seems to suggest that a White Sox series might actually be more of a local draw due to ex-patriate Chicagoans

cards press box
08-21-2010, 01:24 AM
This is interesting. I'm guessing that the A's are the mystery team.

A's seem like a strong guess. Outside possibilities might be K.C., Toronto, Tampa Bay or even Cleveland.

The late Doug Pappas said that MLB looks at the potential television market when deciding what is the best option.

Base population of the core city is secondary to building a strong regional cable network AND the other thing they look at is trying to avoid hurting another team.

With respect to media outlets, local media revenue and population, the best option for a team looking to relocate is, without a doubt, the New York metropolitan area. In fact, the two best relocation options right now might be: (1) Jersey City or somewhere else in Northern New Jersey and (2) lower Manhattan or Brooklyn. Wouldn't it be ironic if someone moved a team to Brooklyn and built a stadium at the corner of Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues, just as Walter O'Malley hoped to do in the mid-1950's before Robert Moses said no.

ewokpelts
08-21-2010, 11:33 AM
A's seem like a strong guess. Outside possibilities might be K.C., Toronto, Tampa Bay or even Cleveland.
.

KC just had upgrades to kauffman, will host 2012 ASG

Toronto - team and stadium owned by canadian company. wont happen unless they are bought by a us investor.

tampa - ironclad lease deal. they'd have to buy it our for a lot of money JUST to be allowed to look at other options.

cleveland - stadium less than 20 years old.

soltrain21
08-21-2010, 12:02 PM
KC just had upgrades to kauffman, will host 2012 ASG

Toronto - team and stadium owned by canadian company. wont happen unless they are bought by a us investor.

tampa - ironclad lease deal. they'd have to buy it our for a lot of money JUST to be allowed to look at other options.

cleveland - stadium less than 20 years old.

Speaking of which, I remember thinking how awesome Jacob's Field was when it opened. It really didn't age all that well.

TomBradley72
08-21-2010, 01:36 PM
Speaking of which, I remember thinking how awesome Jacob's Field was when it opened. It really didn't age all that well.

What's wrong with it? Other than a ton of empty seats?

Hitmen77
08-21-2010, 08:57 PM
KC just had upgrades to kauffman, will host 2012 ASG

Toronto - team and stadium owned by canadian company. wont happen unless they are bought by a us investor.

tampa - ironclad lease deal. they'd have to buy it our for a lot of money JUST to be allowed to look at other options.

cleveland - stadium less than 20 years old.

Despite low attendance, I can't see Cleveland, Kansas City or (in the NL) Pittsburgh going anywhere in the foreseeable future. Like you said, KC just completed a major renovation of their stadium. I can't imagine MLB abandoning Progressive Field and PNC Park so soon after hundreds of millions were spent to built these well-regarded facilities.

Speaking of which, I remember thinking how awesome Jacob's Field was when it opened. It really didn't age all that well.

The thing about Cleveland is that at least every other other low-drawing teams can point to either years of futility or a terrible stadium to blame for their attendance woes.

Florida, Tampa, Oakland can say they play in bad ballparks that are in bad locations. Pittsburgh and KC can say that the problem is the years and years since those teams were in serious contention.

But Cleveland has one of the popular "retro" ballparks and they have had a pretty decent amount of success in recent years. No, they haven't won the WS, but over the last 15 years they have either been serious contenders or quickly rebuilding with good talent. They don't have the same excuse(s) as other small market teams. In contrast, the Brewers have been drawing well at Miller Park despite only one brief playoff appearance and not always having a contending team.

Nellie_Fox
08-22-2010, 01:41 AM
What's wrong with it? Other than a ton of empty seats?My question too.

TDog
08-25-2010, 02:10 PM
retractable roof stadium, just like in arizona and planet houston

After such a thing is built and the Nevada Gaming Commission puts baseball off limits for any sports book in the state year round, you're still left with a lousy place to put a major league baseball team.

NardiWasHere
08-25-2010, 03:17 PM
Coming up with a team name would be fun....

The Las Vegas Aces

The Las Vegas Dealers

Etc.

Ex-Chicagoan
08-25-2010, 03:28 PM
I think Nevada is the only state with worse unemployment than we have in Michigan. This might be a tough sell until things turn the corner.

downstairs
08-26-2010, 01:52 PM
Another knock on Vegas is that its a very transient city. Almost everyone there recently enough moved from somewhere else. Even if they're baseball fans, they probably already have a long history with another team.

Look at most casino workers- they'll often have their home city on their name tag as a gimmick. However, it goes to show how many people call another place "home."