Portland and Montreal + Radical Realignment

[nate82]

re: Montreal, don't forget that a couple years ago there were a couple exhibition games played there, and they drew huge crowds. The people in Montreal will support a team again, if given the chance and assuming they can build a modern stadium.

 

They have also been having end of spring training exhibitions in San Antonio for the past few years with some similar success.

Anyone know if they have been doing anything similar in Portland?

 

On a side note I am surprised that MLB is not looking to put a major league team in Charlotte. City/ Area has grown immensely since the last round of expansion....

 

Charlotte would probably be the #1 destination if MLB decides to move the Rays and to a lesser extent the A's. I think MLB would rather keep the A's on the west coast but if they are not able to move the Rays or are unwillingly to do so the A's would be the next option to move to Charlotte.

 

I think Mexico City or a team in Mexico has a higher chance than a team in Portland or Charlotte. Montreal is definitely going to get a MLB team if there is expansion there is no doubt about it. The second team if they expand option #1 would be Mexico City followed by Portland, Charlotte, and San Antonio. Portland and San Antonio will get first looks over Charlotte as MLB is going to want to add another team on the west coast if they expand.

[owbc]

Charlotte would probably be the #1 destination if MLB decides to move the Rays and to a lesser extent the A's. I think MLB would rather keep the A's on the west coast but if they are not able to move the Rays or are unwillingly to do so the A's would be the next option to move to Charlotte.

 

I think Mexico City or a team in Mexico has a higher chance than a team in Portland or Charlotte. Montreal is definitely going to get a MLB team if there is expansion there is no doubt about it. The second team if they expand option #1 would be Mexico City followed by Portland, Charlotte, and San Antonio. Portland and San Antonio will get first looks over Charlotte as MLB is going to want to add another team on the west coast if they expand.

 

Mexico City has a 0% chance because of the travel distance issue. It is the main reason for doing the whole expansion/realignment thing in the first place! It's also why Portland has a big advantage over another Texas team. The whole idea is to get the Rangers out of the west division, not add another Texas team for the Pacific time zone teams to have to fly to.

 

If the Montreal situation fell through I could see Charlotte being the backup. But Montreal is easily the #1 city on the list so I don't think MLB will miss the opportunity to get a team back there.

[nate82]

Charlotte would probably be the #1 destination if MLB decides to move the Rays and to a lesser extent the A's. I think MLB would rather keep the A's on the west coast but if they are not able to move the Rays or are unwillingly to do so the A's would be the next option to move to Charlotte.

 

I think Mexico City or a team in Mexico has a higher chance than a team in Portland or Charlotte. Montreal is definitely going to get a MLB team if there is expansion there is no doubt about it. The second team if they expand option #1 would be Mexico City followed by Portland, Charlotte, and San Antonio. Portland and San Antonio will get first looks over Charlotte as MLB is going to want to add another team on the west coast if they expand.

 

Mexico City has a 0% chance because of the travel distance issue. It is the main reason for doing the whole expansion/realignment thing in the first place! It's also why Portland has a big advantage over another Texas team. The whole idea is to get the Rangers out of the west division, not add another Texas team for the Pacific time zone teams to have to fly to.

 

If the Montreal situation fell through I could see Charlotte being the backup. But Montreal is easily the #1 city on the list so I don't think MLB will miss the opportunity to get a team back there.

 

Except Manfred wants a team in Mexico City. Yes the travel is going to be bad but option #1 is Montreal and option #2 is Mexico City. There is a huge push by Manfred to get a team in Mexico City. Charlotte is the backup city if they can't get Mexico City to work. If the Rays and the A's can't get a stadium deal done then that team is going to move to Montreal or Charlotte though Manfred really really really wants to add two more teams to the league so Montreal is going to happen one way or the other. I think Portland is actually going to get the short end of the stick here and won't get a team as I think the A's are going to stay in Oakland some how.

 

Mexico City has more than a 0% chance of happening. That travel issue is a problem but again MLB and Manfred want to expand into Mexico. It may not be Mexico City but a team in Mexico is on the agenda and is a real strong possibility.

[trwi7]

The issue with Mexico City is exchange rate. If the team has to pay players in American dollars but charges fans pesos, how much money are they going to make? What is their local TV contract going to look like?

[jerichoholicninja]

re: Montreal, don't forget that a couple years ago there were a couple exhibition games played there, and they drew huge crowds. The people in Montreal will support a team again, if given the chance and assuming they can build a modern stadium.

 

The Blue Jays have played exhibition games there for a few years now and frankly the attendance of those games is irrelevant. You could take any two random MLB teams and play two days in any random US city without an MLB team while charging exhibition game prices and they will be sellouts.

[homer]

I don't think the travel to Mexico City is all that bad. It's better than an east/west coast flight. From Dallas, Miami, Tampa, Houston, Atlanta, Phoenix, San Diego it's 3.5 hours and under direct.

[owbc]

The Blue Jays have played exhibition games there for a few years now and frankly the attendance of those games is irrelevant. You could take any two random MLB teams and play two days in any random US city without an MLB team while charging exhibition game prices and they will be sellouts.

 

Yep, the Blue Jays' TV ratings are what really won the Expos back. The raw viewership numbers were incredible during the playoffs. There is also a huge baseball following in Vancouver BC. From a PR standpoint the exhibition crowds looked really good, and they've been able to sustain it for several years now despite it no longer being a novelty.

[pacopete4]

The issue with Mexico City is exchange rate. If the team has to pay players in American dollars but charges fans pesos, how much money are they going to make? What is their local TV contract going to look like?

 

Don't we already do something similar with this in Toronto and Canada's exchange rate?

[Warning Track Power]

I think MLB is looking at the west coast heavily in order to balance out the leagues and cut down on the travel time. In the Pacific time zone, you essentially have Seattle, Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Los Angeles and San Diego. 6 teams out of 30. The other teams in the west, Arizona, Colorado, Houston and Texas are all either in the Mountain or Central time zone. Without knowing the political issues involved or status of stadiums, I would have to believe one of (and maybe two of the following) would ABSOLUTELY have to be in any expansion. Portland, Vancouver, Salt Lake City and Las Vegas. Because the closest team to Seattle is over 600 miles away, Portland does make all the sense in the world logistically.

[FVBrewerFan]

It sounds like we're still in 1952 or something with all the travel time discussion. So a flight is an extra hour to any of these cities being mentioned, I don't understand the concern. You're going to a city for a 3 game series, I don't see why an hour here or there makes any difference whatsoever.

 

Back to Mexico City, the issues are two-fold. Money and security. The money part we know is always #1. But security has to be a concern. Kidnap/ransom is a real threat in Mexico, even in Mexico City.

[owbc]

It sounds like we're still in 1952 or something with all the travel time discussion. So a flight is an extra hour to any of these cities being mentioned, I don't understand the concern. You're going to a city for a 3 game series, I don't see why an hour here or there makes any difference whatsoever.

 

Back to Mexico City, the issues are two-fold. Money and security. The money part we know is always #1. But security has to be a concern. Kidnap/ransom is a real threat in Mexico, even in Mexico City.

 

The players have asked for less arduous travel schedules and more time off.

[nate82]

I think MLB is looking at the west coast heavily in order to balance out the leagues and cut down on the travel time. In the Pacific time zone, you essentially have Seattle, Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Los Angeles and San Diego. 6 teams out of 30. The other teams in the west, Arizona, Colorado, Houston and Texas are all either in the Mountain or Central time zone. Without knowing the political issues involved or status of stadiums, I would have to believe one of (and maybe two of the following) would ABSOLUTELY have to be in any expansion. Portland, Vancouver, Salt Lake City and Las Vegas. Because the closest team to Seattle is over 600 miles away, Portland does make all the sense in the world logistically.

 

Phoenix is essentially in PST during the whole baseball season as Arizona doesn't observe day light savings.

[Warning Track Power]

Phoenix is essentially in PST during the whole baseball season as Arizona doesn't observe day light savings.

Good point Nate. My point remains though that any idea of adding teams to the east coast prior to adding to Portland, Vancouver, Vegas, etc...seems to be a little shortsighted if one of the main issues is travel. Adding a natural rival for Seattle, who is so distant from any other team, in Portland would be excellent, assuming the desire for baseball and the economics work out.

[FVBrewerFan]

It sounds like we're still in 1952 or something with all the travel time discussion. So a flight is an extra hour to any of these cities being mentioned, I don't understand the concern. You're going to a city for a 3 game series, I don't see why an hour here or there makes any difference whatsoever.

 

Back to Mexico City, the issues are two-fold. Money and security. The money part we know is always #1. But security has to be a concern. Kidnap/ransom is a real threat in Mexico, even in Mexico City.

 

The players have asked for less arduous travel schedules and more time off.

 

I know, but they can get over it. The biggest factor is days off, not whether a flight is an extra hour here and there. When you play 9 out of 10 days on a regular basis I don't think it matters much if that's in San Diego or Mexico City.

 

But they're not going to cut down the number of games, and they're not going to extend the season. They'll just have to learn to live with that inconvenience while making a fine living playing a game.

[trwi7]

The issue with Mexico City is exchange rate. If the team has to pay players in American dollars but charges fans pesos, how much money are they going to make? What is their local TV contract going to look like?

 

Don't we already do something similar with this in Toronto and Canada's exchange rate?

 

The difference is 1 Canadian dollar is equal to 80 cents in the U.S. You need 15 pesos for 79 cents in the U.S. So you're either charging ticket prices that only the super rich can afford or you're making it affordable for middle income people as well and losing your ass on the exchange rate.

[DHonks]

I really like the idea. I've argued for a decade that we should have MLB expand to 32 teams, although I've wanted 8 divisions with 4 teams each. If they want to keep an NL/AL differential, why not have one league bat 9 (with DH) and the other bat 8 (no DH, no pitcher)?

 

My lists have long been New York, Portland, Las Vegas, Boston, Montreal, Charlotte, San Antonio, and maybe Calgary. I think the Mitchell Report called for expansion or moving franchises to New York, New York, LA, Portland, etc (yes, NY could support more teams)

[topper09er]

If you don't want to switch any teams between leagues, you could do

 

NYY

BOS

BAL

TB

 

DET

TOR

CLE

MIN

 

HOU

TEX

KC

CHW

 

LAA

OAK

PORTLAND

SEA

 

 

NYM

WAS

PHIL

MONTREAL

 

MIL

STL

CHC

COL

 

ATL

CIN

MIA

PIT

 

LAD

SF

SD

AZ

 

 

I think they key to any realignment needs to be keeping as many teams in the same time zones as possible. It must be tough being Rangers/Astros fans who have so many west coast games starting 9PM local. If you use the above breakdown the only teams that aren't in the same time zone as the other in their division is Col and Min, and Colorado is the only MLB team in their time zone so that is inevitable.

 

I do like 8 4 team divisions, but just letting the division winners advance to the playoffs. You only have to complete with 3 other teams and that should hopefully prevent the 25 year playoff droughts that are too frequent in MLB. If you overload the schedule to play more division games that should also help reduce the chances of 2 100 win teams in the same division since they will beat up on each other.

[nate82]

The best option if you want to keep the teams in the same time zone is to go to a NBA/NHL league format.

[DHonks]

Phoenix is essentially in PST during the whole baseball season as Arizona doesn't observe day light savings.

Good point Nate. My point remains though that any idea of adding teams to the east coast prior to adding to Portland, Vancouver, Vegas, etc...seems to be a little shortsighted if one of the main issues is travel. Adding a natural rival for Seattle, who is so distant from any other team, in Portland would be excellent, assuming the desire for baseball and the economics work out.

 

Actually, Phoenix is always in MST, which is the same as PDT. Phoenix never observes PST

[DHonks]

One idea I kind of liked from 3-4 years ago on CNN was a proposal to have 2 time zones. It could make sense for business, travel, and other reasons. http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2013/12/tech/cnn10-ideas/

[dlk9s]

It sounds like we're still in 1952 or something with all the travel time discussion. So a flight is an extra hour to any of these cities being mentioned, I don't understand the concern. You're going to a city for a 3 game series, I don't see why an hour here or there makes any difference whatsoever.

 

Back to Mexico City, the issues are two-fold. Money and security. The money part we know is always #1. But security has to be a concern. Kidnap/ransom is a real threat in Mexico, even in Mexico City.

 

I don't think it's an extra hour on a flight that is the problem. It's how many long flights a team has to take that's the problem. The idea of getting another team out west (say, Portland) is to make the total travel for teams out there easier.

 

Now, Seattle has to travel to Houston and Texas for divisional games. With expansion plus realignment, you can sub in Portland and, say, San Francisco for those cities to make total travel easier. Granted, you still may add long-ish flights like LA (Dodgers) and San Diego, but the time zones are at least easier to handle.

[Bob Skube Snacks]

I hate the idea of giving a franchise to a city who already lost a franchise due to lack of support.

 

Some would say baseball failed Montreal. They were on their way to the postseason and possibly their first World Series when the strike wiped out the World Series. They were also on pace to draw almost 2 million fans that year. Fan support dried up after the strike.

 

Not to mention that the same argument posed in the original post was a sentiment that very nearly kept baseball from returning to ... Milwaukee.

 

Recall that the Braves attendance dropped off before rumors of the franchise move became public knowledge. The Braves averaged less than 10K per game in 1962 and 1963 and were second-last in the NL in attendance. An oft-mentioned reason for this was that Braves ownership no longer allowed outside food and drink in the ballpark.

 

A probable move became serious in 1964 and, of course, the Braves played a lame duck season in 1965.

 

Point is, we've been in the same situation Montreal is in. I empathize with them and hope they get the Expos back. They got a raw deal.

[Bob Skube Snacks]

Random thoughts about this.

 

Why not Indy? Whenever expansion comes up, or teams moving, seems Indy never comes up. History of AAA ball there, and I could see the whole state backing them- similar to the Brewers and Twins. Maybe they even market hard in Louisville and develop a fan base coming up from there.

 

I've lived in Indiana, more or less, since the late 80s, and this will never happen for a variety of reasons:

 

- There's no MLB-capable stadium and zero desire to fund/build one.

- Indianapolis is within five hours of four existing teams and within six or seven of three more, including the Brewers. The Midwest is saturated with enough teams so there's no upside from MLB point of view. Not to mention, the Reds in particular, but also the Cubs, Cardinals and White Sox would oppose it.

- Indy has long been a Reds/Cubs city. Loyalties change per region depending on the geography (For example, Fort Wayne is Chicago team, Tigers, Indians, Reds territory. Evansville is heavy-duty Cardinals), but what fans there are have established loyalties with existing teams and that won't easily be broken.

- I've lived in five states and Indiana is easily the worst when it comes to enthusiasm for baseball. There are pockets of support here and there, mostly in border areas, but apathy reigns. It just wouldn't work well here.

 

Indy tried to get the Pirates in the mid 80s, but the then-Hoosier Dome couldn't accommodate baseball (it would have been 260 down the RF line!). There was an Indy expansion organization - the Arrows - around the same time, but it faded in the late 80s and nothing has been seriously proposed since.

[MadThinker88]

..... Indy tried to get the Pirates in the mid 80s, but the then-Hoosier Dome couldn't accommodate baseball (it would have been 260 down the RF line!). There was an Indy expansion organization - the Arrows - around the same time, but it faded in the late 80s and nothing has been seriously proposed since.

 

Interesting tidbit you bring up as the Indy Indians are the AAA affiliate for the Pittsburgh Pirates & have been the affiliate of the Pirates since 2005...