D-Backs to remain in NLW

[WildBB]

Looks like this is pretty much a done deal , with Astros going to ALW.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7...-astros-sale-conditional-move-american-league

 

[Dback Jon]

As they should!

 

[Brian in Mesa]

 

[carey]

That's going to suck for their fans. Most of the games at division rivals are going to go way past the casual fan's bedtime.

 

[WildBB]

That's going to suck for their fans. Most of the games at division rivals are going to go way past the casual fan's bedtime.

Nolan Ryan mentions that in the article too. That it's tough for the fans to follow away games. Then he goes on and says that an in state rival will help in that reguard esp. if the Astros become good.

 

[HooverDam]

Very glad its not the D'backs going to the AL. Now if we can only lure the Astros (along with StL and the Twins) to the Cactus League!

 

[BC867]

As a National League fan (or is it Yankee and American League hater) for fifty-nine years, I am thrilled that, for the second time, Major League Baseball has decided to keep our hometown Diamondbacks in the National League, by vetoing the sale of the Astros if they did not change leagues.

I guess Commish Bud Light has some redeeming characteristics after all.

 

[Mathew81]

Good that the DBacks are staying in the NL. But this means interleague play every day of the season. Don't like it.

 

[Lefty]

Good that the DBacks are staying in the NL. But this means interleague play every day of the season. Don't like it.

I also don't like that two more wild card teams will be added.

 

[crisper57]

Good that the DBacks are staying in the NL. But this means interleague play every day of the season. Don't like it.

I don't hate it because interleague play will rotate, so it will still be a special series when it comes to a particular town.

And an NL team had to go. It wasn't fair that 4-of-14 AL teams (29%) got into the post season, but only 4-of-16 NL teams (25%) did.

And when the economy recovers, they can always add 2 more teams to do away with interleague every day.

 

[Mulli]

I don't hate it because interleague play will rotate, so it will still be a special series when it comes to a particular town.

And an NL team had to go. It wasn't fair that 4-of-14 AL teams (29%) got into the post season, but only 4-of-16 NL teams (25%) did.

And when the economy recovers, they can always add 2 more teams to do away with interleague every day.

Really?

 

[crisper57]

Really?

You know they will. Yes, they were discussing contraction a few years ago, but baseball is in a healthy spot right now. And there are untapped markets out there.

Plus, all the international players rolling into the Big Leagues finally makes expansion sustainable from a talent perspective.

It will happen. The money says it has to at some point. And the "purists" will support it in order to get rid of interleague every day.

 

[HooverDam]

And there are untapped markets out there.

Such as? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I can't think of many US markets that seem like logical fits for baseball. Vegas of course wants any kind of major league team it can get, but basketball probably makes the most sense there (indoors, smallest arena, the city has a hoops tradition w/ UNLV, season lines up with their highest tourist time of year, etc).

It seems generally when leagues expand they do one team in the West & another in the East (i.e. Rays & D'backs, Raptors & Grizzlies, Rockies & Marlins, etc). I can't really think of an Eastern market that seems like an ideal fit for the MLB.....Charlotte maybe? But NC already seems spread thin between the Panthers, Bobcats, Hurricane & Tobacco Road schools.

Currently the largest MSA's in the US to not have MLB teams are:
13. Riverside-San Bernadino (4.2M); unlikely to get a team due to the proximity of LA, LAA and SD.

23. Portland, Oregon (2.2M)....do they seem to be a great fit? I dunno...meh

24. Sacramento (2.15M)...they can barely hang onto the Kings and have the Giants and A's not too far away.

25. San Antonio (2.14M)...its a fairly good size market with only one pro team (Spurs), so maybe.

30. Vegas (1.95M)...discussed above

31. San Jose (1.83M) too close to SF & Oak

32. Columbus (1.8M) doesn't seem logical, too close to Cleveland & Cincy

33. Charlotte (1.75M)...maybe, I dunno, doesn't seem like they're dying for baseball.

34. Indianapolis (1.75M)....maybe? Seems like for a mid market like them having NBA & NFL is probably enough, but they don't have anything in the summer.

Then you start getting into Cities like Providence, Oklahoma City, Salt Lake City, etc. Maybe SLC, they just have the NBA & MLS, maybe they'd be a fit but it seems like there just aren't many obvious markets that are obvious fits for the MLB.

6 divisions of 5 teams each works out pretty nice, I kinda think the MLB will be happy to leave it at that for a while.

 

[Mulli]

You know they will. Yes, they were discussing contraction a few years ago, but baseball is in a healthy spot right now. And there are untapped markets out there.

Plus, all the international players rolling into the Big Leagues finally makes expansion sustainable from a talent perspective.

It will happen. The money says it has to at some point. And the "purists" will support it in order to get rid of interleague every day.

There is nowhere near enough pitching talent to go around, in my opinion.

 

[crisper57]

Such as? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I can't think of many US markets that seem like logical fits for baseball. Vegas of course wants any kind of major league team it can get, but basketball probably makes the most sense there (indoors, smallest arena, the city has a hoops tradition w/ UNLV, season lines up with their highest tourist time of year, etc).

It seems generally when leagues expand they do one team in the West & another in the East (i.e. Rays & D'backs, Raptors & Grizzlies, Rockies & Marlins, etc). I can't really think of an Eastern market that seems like an ideal fit for the MLB.....Charlotte maybe? But NC already seems spread thin between the Panthers, Bobcats, Hurricane & Tobacco Road schools.

Currently the largest MSA's in the US to not have MLB teams are:
13. Riverside-San Bernadino (4.2M); unlikely to get a team due to the proximity of LA, LAA and SD.

23. Portland, Oregon (2.2M)....do they seem to be a great fit? I dunno...meh

24. Sacramento (2.15M)...they can barely hang onto the Kings and have the Giants and A's not too far away.

25. San Antonio (2.14M)...its a fairly good size market with only one pro team (Spurs), so maybe.

30. Vegas (1.95M)...discussed above

31. San Jose (1.83M) too close to SF & Oak

32. Columbus (1.8M) doesn't seem logical, too close to Cleveland & Cincy

33. Charlotte (1.75M)...maybe, I dunno, doesn't seem like they're dying for baseball.

34. Indianapolis (1.75M)....maybe? Seems like for a mid market like them having NBA & NFL is probably enough, but they don't have anything in the summer.

Then you start getting into Cities like Providence, Oklahoma City, Salt Lake City, etc. Maybe SLC, they just have the NBA & MLS, maybe they'd be a fit but it seems like there just aren't many obvious markets that are obvious fits for the MLB.

6 divisions of 5 teams each works out pretty nice, I kinda think the MLB will be happy to leave it at that for a while.

Yesterday they discussed this on the Doug and Wolf. Doug thought the Austin-San Antonio market would be good for 2 reasons: huge population base for eyeballs and a large corporate base for luxury suites. They offered Brooklyn as the other option in order to cut into the Yankee revenue base "for the good of the game". I think the Mets would have a bigger issue with that though.

I like your idea for Indy. That would make sense too.

 

[crisper57]

There is nowhere near enough pitching talent to go around, in my opinion.

And that fits perfectly into baseball pushing for more offense to generate more excitement!

 

[HooverDam]

^ Austin & San Antonio aren't the same market though, they're an 1 1/2 away.

If I was the MLB I'd be looking at states that don't have teams already if I thought expansion was the right thing. That way theoretically you don't just get the City, but the whole state (a la the D'backs). So cities like Portland (Oregon), Salt Lake, Las Vegas, Indianapolis & Charlotte would rank higher on my personal list than Brooklyn, San Antonio, the Inland Empire, San Jose, etc.

 

[crisper57]

^ Austin & San Antonio aren't the same market though, they're an 1 1/2 away.

If I was the MLB I'd be looking at states that don't have teams already if I thought expansion was the right thing. That way theoretically you don't just get the City, but the whole state (a la the D'backs). So cities like Portland (Oregon), Salt Lake, Las Vegas, Indianapolis & Charlotte would rank higher on my personal list than Brooklyn, San Antonio, the Inland Empire, San Jose, etc.

So build the stadium halfway between them and then it is a 45 minute commute from either hub! Actually, I think SA would be a really good fit. I would love a Vegas team, but it will never happen. They'd have the same attendance issues that PHX has in the summer.

 

[asudevil83]

New Orleans
Salt Lake City
Memphis
Portland

those would be my choices

 

[BillsCarnage]

I'd like to know the reason of why the Astros?

Why not have moved the Brewers back to the AL Central and kicked KC to the AL West??

 

[Mathew81]

I'd like to know the reason of why the Astros?

Why not have moved the Brewers back to the AL Central and kicked KC to the AL West??

1. Milwaukee is Bud Selig's team, even though he's not technically the owner anymore. He's always wanted them in the NL so that's where they are.
2. Milwaukee fits more with the rest of the NL Central.
3. Texas probably wanted Houston so they had a more natural rival in the AL West
4. It was easier to force Houston's new owner to agree to it as a condition of buying the team rather than try and get a current owner of another team to switch

 

[Dback Jon]

1. Milwaukee is Bud Selig's team, even though he's not technically the owner anymore. He's always wanted them in the NL so that's where they are.
2. Milwaukee fits more with the rest of the NL Central.
3. Texas probably wanted Houston so they had a more natural rival in the AL West
4. It was easier to force Houston's new owner to agree to it as a condition of buying the team rather than try and get a current owner of another team to switch

All very valid points.

Texas has always wanted a division mate in the same time zone. Everyone else is two hours away.
Owners have veto power over League moves. So the only realistic shot is to make it a condition of the sale.

Hence, Houston was the golden opportunity for MLB

 

[Diamondback Jay]

Moving Houston to the AL West with the Rangers made the most sense anyhow.

 

[coyoteshockeyfan]

Good. I hear more than enough about NY and Boston as it is. Don't need to put up with even more just by switching leagues.