You get what you pay for: the AL/NL discrepancy

[hoyasnaxa]

If the Yankees were to switch to the National League, the distribution would reverse. I think it will balance out more in the near future, and I think the rise of the Mets and the NL West will help that, but the AL has the Yankees and Red Sox, has to pay another hitter due to the DH, and because of this should be the league with higher payrolls.

The AL has also done better in interleague play and All Star games, but I really dont think there is a drastic difference in GM quality between the two leagues.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

[ QUOTE ]
there's also cultural factors at play here - baseball is huge in Boston and always has been, whereas it just isn't that big in say, Atlanta.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with that to a certain extent, baseball is huge here however, it is somewhat mythology that Fenway Park has always been packed. growing up, only the biggest games would sell out - getting tickets was pretty easy (am 31). the Red Sox are MUCH bigger now than they have ever been. that said, people used to tell stories about how you could go the beach in the summer, walk up and down, and not miss a pitch, b/c so many people were listening to the game on the radio. again, that's partly true, but mostly mythology I think.

[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention that is the whole Red Sox Nation being counted? Seems to me they've got from Hartford east as part of their fan base.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, Nate was pretty careful about how he counted. CT was split, etc.

[James282]

the "has to pay another hitter due to the DH" argument is flawed because of the fact that simply needing a dh doesn't make more money appear in the coffers to pay for one. let's move past that please.

[MicroBob]

baseball isn't big in Atlanta?

I mean, I know they have had some apathy and non-sellouts after all their playoff appearances, etc.
But I think that's a far cry from saying baseball isn't big there.


I also like the point about Nate's article (haven't seen it) about Boston being 'large' market in baseball terms even though they really aren't.

Conversely, Miami is a pretty big market technically I believe. But in baseball they are considered 'small' market because of their crappy stadium and low attendance.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]

Conversely, Miami is a pretty big market technically I believe. But in baseball they are considered 'small' market because of their crappy stadium and low attendance.

[/ QUOTE ]

...and the fact that they have only been around for a few years and during the summer it's hotter than balls down there and there are a million other outdoors things to do besides go see a baseball game where you sit around and sweat forever, and since you probably didn't grow up there you have another team somewhere else that you root for on MLB.tv.

James

[hoyasnaxa]

The entire point of the DH was to eliminate watching pitchers hit, because the fans didnt want to see it. So I think that it might actually put more money in the coffers because people would rather watch the AL due to the DH. So I think it is a difference, and a pretty important one also.

[Triumph36]

KBZ -

c'mon now. Yankee Stadium was a half-empty dump in the Bronx in the late 80s and early 90s, now it's packed from May onwards. It's because the possibility is there of creating a huge buzz for baseball in these cities - whereas in a lot of places, you just aren't going to get that kind of solidarity. I don't think you can attribute it to 'past front offices' - this goes back 60, 70, 80 years - there were two teams in Boston for a reason.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Red Sox play in like the 11th biggest market in the country, yet to many they are lumped in with the Yankees as being the 800lb gorillas in MLB. sure they spend a lot, but a lot of that is b/c how well run the club is, and how much revenue they generate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, but their biggest asset is history and brand recognition. This is a monumental edge that can not be attributed to the current front office. People in the greater Boston area have loved the Sox forever, and passed this down to their kids, embedding greater revenue generating potential regardless of market size. Maybe this is a credit to past Red Sox front offices, maybe it was simply luck, it's very tough to say.

Certainly, teams can impact how much money their team earns in the future by fielding more competitive clubs, but this is a slow process of getting players at a good value who will also add marginal wins based on their abilities. Much, much easier said than done.

[/ QUOTE ]

as I said above, I agree with most of this. however, the idea that Fenway has always been packed/Red Sox generated huge historical revenue is almost certainly inflated.

here is a link to historical attendance data. you'll see the Red Sox were just like a bunch of other teams for long streched of years.

[jtown1010]

I think if you put an exciting product on the field, the fans will show up. Boston and Atlanta are 2 good examples of that. In the early 90's, Atlanta had an extremly exciting team to watch, and the city became a baseball city seemingly overnight. As the team got older and more predictable/less exciting, the fans stopped showing up in hordes. A similar situation happened in Boston in the late 90's, but they've managed to keep an exciting team on the field for a long time.

Teams like NYY and NYM will always have a huge fanbase and tons of money/resources. You can certainly make up for lack of a huge payroll by having superior talent evaluation/development at the minor league level, teams like Minnesota, Oakland, and the Brewers(to a much lesser extant than the other 2, but I have a feeling they are going to continue to improve) have shown that over the years.

[James282]

kb4z, i am sure that they had down stretches - there is no debating that. the point is that when the team gets good people will definitely go pack the stadium. this is all i'm saying.

James