OT: MLB commish - Las Vegas being considered for expansion team

[De Montreal]

Didnt know there was interest in VanCity for a baseball team. interesting.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

Didnt know there was interest in VanCity for a baseball team. interesting.

BC is hotbed for Canadian baseball talents.

 

[End on a Hinote]

Didnt know there was interest in VanCity for a baseball team. interesting.

Vancouver, like a number of larger Canadian cities are being held back for more teams for one reason: the country they are in.

At 2.5 million, Vancouver (and Montreal) is far too big to be only a 1 of 4 pro sports team city. I believe Vancouver is capable of supporting not only an MLB team but an NBA team as well (they never should have left in the first place). There are a number of equal/smaller cities than Vancity that have 2-3 teams (AND an MLS team as well).

 

[Melrose Munch]

Vancouver, like a number of larger Canadian cities are being held back for more teams for one reason: the country they are in.

At 2.5 million, Vancouver (and Montreal) is far too big to be only a 1 of 4 pro sports team city. I believe Vancouver is capable of supporting not only an MLB team but an NBA team as well (they never should have left in the first place). There are a number of equal/smaller cities than Vancity that have 2-3 teams (AND an MLS team as well).

But where are the owners? You're right but Vancouver's business community needs to step up here.

 

[End on a Hinote]

But where are the owners? You're right but Vancouver's business community needs to step up here.

Agreed. It seems Vancouver's business community holds far too little interest in sports teams. Although I do hear rumors of the Aquilinis holding interest in another team be it MLB or NBA. Same for the Caps owners Greg Kerfoot. So there is some hope there.

(I'd rather MLB, but NBA is probably more realistic and would still be huge for the city)

 

[StreetHawk]

Agreed. It seems Vancouver's business community holds far too little interest in sports teams. Although I do hear rumors of the Aquilinis holding interest in another team be it MLB or NBA. Same for the Caps owners Greg Kerfoot. So there is some hope there.

(I'd rather MLB, but NBA is probably more realistic and would still be huge for the city)

I don’t see what has changed in Vancouver that would make an nba player want to sign with Vancouver. Still remember multiple players back in the day not wanting to be here. Nba, the players have the power, so that would be harder to change their opinions of the city. But, Rogers arena is in place so no building needs to be built. That’s the plus.

As for mlb, stadium location would be key. It has to be near public transit. There’s no space by Rogers or bc place for one. Really leaves the land by the waterfront that Kerfoot has but it would be tough to get a stadium authorized with the surrounding community businesses. That has always been th holdup for kerfoot to get the whitecaps their soccer stadium. Think baseball would do fine here. It’s not as star driven, so easier to build a good team.

 

[PCSPounder]

again, you struck yourself out, BK, SHOW THE FORUM WHERE Major league baseball has CONFIRMED expansion to 32....

No, it has not.

Rob Manfred says he WANTS to go to 32. That doesn't mean the owners have signed off on any specific plan.

Of course he's going to pump up the possibility. Any proposed ballpark that really comes out of this "proposed expansion" puts pressure on Oakland and Tampa to bend to their will.

There's no way anyone is really leaving Oakland, BTW. Tampa... who knows?

Now, who else besides Portland has even come up with a drawing? Not that this means Portland is really in the running. My view of the scenario... the developers will want subsidies for the 8,000-unit development they want to build. That's where the city either helps out... or digs in. I wouldn't bet in favor of the baseball people on that one.

Oh, BTW... the minor league thing is silly, but in a different way. There are territories to buy off. Thing is, MLB isn't going to approve anyone who can't buy off a minor league territory 3 ways to Sunday... and guess who is really in charge of the territories. Yes... the "commissioner of baseball." Mr. Manfred.

 

[willy702]

Vegas is always being used to up the ante for others, but its never going to be a good MLB market. NHL and NFL work perfectly for the size of the market because local TV money plays only a small role in their success. MGM might want an NBA team pretty badly to support their businesses, but the poor TV contract they would get would be a handicap to the franchise's success so unless MGM itself owns them it will be hard to financially make that work. And an MLB team would be a total disaster for fan support and TV money. Plus after the Raiders stadium generated such strong responses, there is no way they get public support for a stadium again. The Summerlin ballpark is being built for a reasonable amount and the LVCVA pretty much made it happen with its generous naming rights deal. To make the step up to MLB standards, including doing something to make it more weather friendly, the only way it happens is with public money.

 

[KevFu]

Rob Manfred says he WANTS to go to 32. That doesn't mean the owners have signed off on any specific plan.

Of course he's going to pump up the possibility. Any proposed ballpark that really comes out of this "proposed expansion" puts pressure on Oakland and Tampa to bend to their will.

There's no way anyone is really leaving Oakland, BTW. Tampa... who knows?

Now, who else besides Portland has even come up with a drawing? Not that this means Portland is really in the running. My view of the scenario... the developers will want subsidies for the 8,000-unit development they want to build. That's where the city either helps out... or digs in. I wouldn't bet in favor of the baseball people on that one.

I think his frequent talks are to try and rouse interest in a 32nd city so someone gets real with joining Montreal.

Manfred has always said that expansion would come after Oakland/Tampa situations are sufficiently resolved.

I really don't think MLB would let Oakland leave the market -- for the exact same reason that (a) the sale/move of the Giants to Tampa was vetoed, and (b) the Giants are strong-arming the A's on San Jose: anyone leaving a two-team market makes it virtually impossible to come back; and and one team alone in that market would be a financial juggernaut.

 

[Jeffrey93]

Manfred has repeatedly stated they do not expect any prospective MLB city to build a ballpark before they're awarded a team.

That's the way it should be. The NHL jerks around a lot of people and markets by insisting an arena is built and in place before even considering the market. It's ridiculous.
Have some firm commitments for land and funding and all that in place....but the building shouldn't need to be physically built to be considered.

You're setting people up to fail....and dissuading people from wanting to join your group...which lowers franchise values.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

That's the way it should be. The NHL jerks around a lot of people and markets by insisting an arena is built and in place before even considering the market. It's ridiculous.
Have some firm commitments for land and funding and all that in place....but the building shouldn't need to be physically built to be considered.

You're setting people up to fail....and dissuading people from wanting to join your group...which lowers franchise values.

It actually makes sense for NHL to do that because arenas can still host many concerts and events without an NHL tenant. MLB stadiums are virtually useless without a team playing there right away.

 

[PCSPounder]

I think his frequent talks are to try and rouse interest in a 32nd city so someone gets real with joining Montreal.

Manfred has always said that expansion would come after Oakland/Tampa situations are sufficiently resolved.

I really don't think MLB would let Oakland leave the market -- for the exact same reason that (a) the sale/move of the Giants to Tampa was vetoed, and (b) the Giants are strong-arming the A's on San Jose: anyone leaving a two-team market makes it virtually impossible to come back; and and one team alone in that market would be a financial juggernaut.

I always felt MLB thought the cache of the Giants > A's. They weren't going to abandon San Francisco and leave the whole thing to Oakland. I don't think they would veto the A's leaving.

The A's would be insane to leave because of the TV market. Lew Wolff had his opportunity to go and didn't play the game.

 

[KevFu]

I always felt MLB thought the cache of the Giants > A's. They weren't going to abandon San Francisco and leave the whole thing to Oakland. I don't think they would veto the A's leaving.

The A's would be insane to leave because of the TV market. Lew Wolff had his opportunity to go and didn't play the game.

Well, if the Giants had left, the A's (who were a powerhouse at the time) would be able to build a stadium anywhere within the Bay Area; and they'd have a new revenue-providing stadium and a massive TV region.

We talk about market size as MSAs, but with the TV territory the way it is, the CSAs are a better reference.

The Bay Area is the No. 5 Combined Statistical Area in the US (SF-OAK-SJ), and Sacramento (No. 25 CSA) is part of their TV market, along with Fresno (No, 55). That means you'd have one team in the No. 3 sized CSA while the other four of the Top 5 are two-team CSAs (NY, LA, Chicago, and DC/Baltimore).

 

[Melrose Munch]

I think his frequent talks are to try and rouse interest in a 32nd city so someone gets real with joining Montreal.

Manfred has always said that expansion would come after Oakland/Tampa situations are sufficiently resolved.

I really don't think MLB would let Oakland leave the market -- for the exact same reason that (a) the sale/move of the Giants to Tampa was vetoed, and (b) the Giants are strong-arming the A's on San Jose: anyone leaving a two-team market makes it virtually impossible to come back; and and one team alone in that market would be a financial juggernaut.

They did that in 1959 with the NY Giants and Brooklyn Dodgers though. I think if Oakland left for Portland or Vancouver BC it would not be the end of the world, just imo. And maybe Florida needs only one team.

I always felt MLB thought the cache of the Giants > A's. They weren't going to abandon San Francisco and leave the whole thing to Oakland. I don't think they would veto the A's leaving.

The A's would be insane to leave because of the TV market. Lew Wolff had his opportunity to go and didn't play the game.

Selig said publically he regretted the A's leaving Philly when he was a kid. The A's have a better history imo.

 

[KevFu]

They did that in 1959 with the NY Giants and Brooklyn Dodgers though. I think if Oakland left for Portland or Vancouver BC it would not be the end of the world, just imo. And maybe Florida needs only one team.

I don't think that the National League was worried about mega-million cable TV deals in 1959.

 

[Melrose Munch]

I don't think that the National League was worried about mega-million cable TV deals in 1959.

Fair but does Oakland draw well? I thinknthays the difference.

 

[Zenos]

4) Montreal would be an outpost city in the NE. With their weather, you might want an indoor stadium. Olympic Stadium may get a new retractable roof by 2023 for the World Cup in 2026. The estimated cost is $200M over 5 years. There is talk of a new stadium being built. The Big O(we) is over 40 years old. I remember Jarry Park, the original baseball stadium in Montreal. It was awful, as was the weather. You can't play outdoors up there, unless it is hockey.

I wouldn't be so sure. The ill-fated Labatt Park wasn't planned an indoor stadium after all. And certainly anyone eyeing a potential MLB club for Montreal has seen how intimate, outdoor stadiums have helped create a positive fan culture for the Als and Impact (and know all too well how that same atmosphere never materialised at the closed-roof Big O).

Like in Minneapolis, I imagine they'll take their chances with poor weather early in the season, knowing full-well that in summer, nothing beats catching a game outdoors.

 

[StreetHawk]

Honestly ballparks are better off with a Seattle type cover rather than a Miami, Houston, Toronto, Milwaukee enclosed roof.

Harder configuration to close than a football stadium.

 

[Price is Wright]

I don’t see what has changed in Vancouver that would make an nba player want to sign with Vancouver. Still remember multiple players back in the day not wanting to be here. Nba, the players have the power, so that would be harder to change their opinions of the city. But, Rogers arena is in place so no building needs to be built. That’s the plus.

Way more international players.

 

[StreetHawk]

Way more international players.

That’s true but still to bank that you basically have Draft those guys over Americans and hope that they are as impactful is always a risk. Going international didn’t do great wonders for the Raptors.

Would need 2 of them a to set a foundation for the club.

 

[Price is Wright]

That’s true but still to bank that you basically have Draft those guys over Americans and hope that they are as impactful is always a risk. Going international didn’t do great wonders for the Raptors.

Would need 2 of them a to set a foundation for the club.

You don't go full international. You have to find a balance. Houston and San Antonio have done it in the past. You find guys who want to play there and guys who just want to play in the NBA. Leverage everyone else until you find a roster people want to play for.

Everyone forgets that nobody is happy in Memphis either but it's not as big of a deal as what happened in Vancouver. The NBA has openly talked about regretting leaving early.

 

[StreetHawk]

You don't go full international. You have to find a balance. Houston and San Antonio have done it in the past. You find guys who want to play there and guys who just want to play in the NBA. Leverage everyone else until you find a roster people want to play for.

Everyone forgets that nobody is happy in Memphis either but it's not as big of a deal as what happened in Vancouver. The NBA has openly talked about regretting leaving early.

There are just so many nba cities that are just there to house a team basically. But a lot of Those cities are not competing with the nhl like Indiana, Memphis, Sacramento, Portland, Utah, SAN Antonio, Orlando, New Orleans, Charlotte, etc.

Outside of the spurs which had quality low ego players none of those teams have done anything over the past decade.

I just don’t know how much the fans in Vancity will put up with just having a team vs one that can compete.

 

[Ernie]

No chance Vancouver gets a franchise as long as the CAD stays where it is.

But it would be a great location if the exchange rate improves. I don't buy that players wouldn't want to be here, it's a nice location particularly for international players.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

There are just so many nba cities that are just there to house a team basically. But a lot of Those cities are not competing with the nhl like Indiana, Memphis, Sacramento, Portland, Utah, SAN Antonio, Orlando, New Orleans, Charlotte, etc.

Outside of the spurs which had quality low ego players none of those teams have done anything over the past decade.

I just don’t know how much the fans in Vancity will put up with just having a team vs one that can compete.

then why do the Spurs essentially own San Antonio, Street, there is hockey in SA

 

[Ernie]

There are just so many nba cities that are just there to house a team basically. But a lot of Those cities are not competing with the nhl like Indiana, Memphis, Sacramento, Portland, Utah, SAN Antonio, Orlando, New Orleans, Charlotte, etc.

Outside of the spurs which had quality low ego players none of those teams have done anything over the past decade.

I just don’t know how much the fans in Vancity will put up with just having a team vs one that can compete.

The bigger question is whether the NBA hamstrings the franchise from the get go like they did last time.