Las Vegas A's

[wazzu31]

And baseball fans are more family oriented or retired whereas football/basketball/hockey are more about the party.

It’s just odd seeing the A’s projections. In Orlando those numbers make sense because the math adds up cause there are enough tourists for 1 game. The A’s seem to be banking on people are going to spend 1/2 their trip to Vegas at a baseball game.

 

[Hunter Montana]

After Las Vegas, it would be cool if they move back to Kansas City and then move back to Philadelphia.

 

[Drasci]

As a European, this is one thing I will never be able to tolerate about the American sports system. Separating a sports team from its city is inconceivable, but if it is a team historically attached to that city (as it was for the A's) then I would say that this is out of my mind!

 

[wazzu31]

As a European, this is one thing I will never be able to tolerate about the American sports system. Separating a sports team from its city is inconceivable, but if it is a team historically attached to that city (as it was for the A's) then I would say that this is out of my mind!

But Europe is different with sports in general.

A. Winning is crucial for monetary reasons
B. You don’t get rewarded for losing like you do in American sports
C. And Europe isn’t obsessed with shitty architecture like American sport fans are. Every stadium and house in America now days is built with like a 10 year time window on it

 

[fightinfunbags]

As a European, this is one thing I will never be able to tolerate about the American sports system. Separating a sports team from its city is inconceivable, but if it is a team historically attached to that city (as it was for the A's) then I would say that this is out of my mind!

Actually, the A’s roots aren’t in Oakland. They’re in Philadelphia.

 

[calsnowskier]

Actually, the A’s roots aren’t in Oakland. They’re in Philadelphia.

Every team that has ever called Oakland “home” has been a vagabond team.

 

[Drasci]

But Europe is different with sports in general.

A. Winning is crucial for monetary reasons
B. You don’t get rewarded for losing like you do in American sports
C. And Europe isn’t obsessed with shitty architecture like American sport fans are. Every stadium and house in America now days is built with like a 10 year time window on it

in reality your system in my opinion is better in almost all aspects:

-In the American sports leagues there is no way a team can achieve such political and economic hegemony as to make it win ten titles in a row. Perhaps the only example is the Boston Celtics who seem to have won many titles in a row for a long time, but it is a rare case. With you, the field counts, and no one can try to have hegemony outside the field.

-In the American sports leagues the distribution of revenues is democratic, in Italy or Spain Real Madrid, Juventus, Barcelona or Inter get the highest percentage of everything, including TV rights.


-in the American sports leagues the referees are more professional and less corrupt, here there are teams that, in order to stay at the top, build cheating systems in agreement with referees, the league and even mixing with politics.

-it's not true that you have ugly stadiums, come and see how disgusting the Olympic stadium is in Rome and you will understand what an ugly stadium is!


Only two things I don't appreciate about the American system:

1) The lack of reccessions and qualifications, but I understand that due to the cultural, demographic, urban and political characteristics, in your country it makes more sense to always have those fixed teams representing large cities (but more so states). In Europe everything is much more fragmented across the territory, identity is often more linked to the narrow territory and about ten kilometers from your city there will be another one that you will already feel is different from you.


2) as I already said, the fact that a team can change city, I can't explain it, is something that I find makes no sense.

Actually, the A’s roots aren’t in Oakland. They’re in Philadelphia.

yes, but he was at Oaklamd since '68 and won many titles there, then it's the historic team from the film Moneyball!

 

[wazzu31]

in reality your system in my opinion is better in almost all aspects:

-In the American sports leagues there is no way a team can achieve such political and economic hegemony as to make it win ten titles in a row. Perhaps the only example is the Boston Celtics who seem to have won many titles in a row for a long time, but it is a rare case. With you, the field counts, and no one can try to have hegemony outside the field.

-In the American sports leagues the distribution of revenues is democratic, in Italy or Spain Real Madrid, Juventus, Barcelona or Inter get the highest percentage of everything, including TV rights.


-in the American sports leagues the referees are more professional and less corrupt, here there are teams that, in order to stay at the top, build cheating systems in agreement with referees, the league and even mixing with politics.

-it's not true that you have ugly stadiums, come and see how disgusting the Olympic stadium is in Rome and you will understand what an ugly stadium is!


Only two things I don't appreciate about the American system:

1) The lack of reccessions and qualifications, but I understand that due to the cultural, demographic, urban and political characteristics, in your country it makes more sense to always have those fixed teams representing large cities (but more so states). In Europe everything is much more fragmented across the territory, identity is often more linked to the narrow territory and about ten kilometers from your city there will be another one that you will already feel is different from you.


2) as I already said, the fact that a team can change city, I can't explain it, is something that I find makes no sense.


yes, but he was at Oaklamd since '68 and won many titles there, then it's the historic team from the film Moneyball!

-It’s not that the American sports stadiums are ugly, it’s that they are architecturally retarded and are made for looks not for longevity. Oakland is the extreme example but all multi purpose stadiums weren’t meant for longevity but convenience. If you look at a lot new American professional sports stadiums need massive upgrades within the first 5 years. Which is why American college sports > professional sports because their stadiums are built with love not putting lipstick on a pig because politically it is better saying they built a 500 million dollar stadium than admitting it is really 200 million with 300 million worth of waste or greasing the wheels of donors who supported the stadium.

-Moneyball is propoganda and Bill James have been proven over and over his philosophy cannot win a championship.

 

[broncosmitty]

in reality your system in my opinion is better in almost all aspects:

-In the American sports leagues there is no way a team can achieve such political and economic hegemony as to make it win ten titles in a row. Perhaps the only example is the Boston Celtics who seem to have won many titles in a row for a long time, but it is a rare case. With you, the field counts, and no one can try to have hegemony outside the field.

-In the American sports leagues the distribution of revenues is democratic, in Italy or Spain Real Madrid, Juventus, Barcelona or Inter get the highest percentage of everything, including TV rights.


-in the American sports leagues the referees are more professional and less corrupt, here there are teams that, in order to stay at the top, build cheating systems in agreement with referees, the league and even mixing with politics.

-it's not true that you have ugly stadiums, come and see how disgusting the Olympic stadium is in Rome and you will understand what an ugly stadium is!


Only two things I don't appreciate about the American system:

1) The lack of reccessions and qualifications, but I understand that due to the cultural, demographic, urban and political characteristics, in your country it makes more sense to always have those fixed teams representing large cities (but more so states). In Europe everything is much more fragmented across the territory, identity is often more linked to the narrow territory and about ten kilometers from your city there will be another one that you will already feel is different from you.


2) as I already said, the fact that a team can change city, I can't explain it, is something that I find makes no sense.


yes, but he was at Oaklamd since '68 and won many titles there, then it's the historic team from the film Moneyball!

Appreciate the well thought out perspective of a sports fan from outside North America.

Relegation is beyond our means, due to the special relationship our government enjoys with our major professional sports.

Big money and big power with markets here.

 

[calsnowskier]

I am FAR from an expert on relegation (in fact, I know next to nothing about it), but the concept I have lazily decided to attach to the word sounds fun, if completely impossible for North American sports. MAYBE it could work in college, but even there, the money is just too big for it to ever be adopted.

 

[Cedrique]

-It’s not that the American sports stadiums are ugly, it’s that they are architecturally retarded and are made for looks not for longevity. Oakland is the extreme example but all multi purpose stadiums weren’t meant for longevity but convenience. If you look at a lot new American professional sports stadiums need massive upgrades within the first 5 years. Which is why American college sports > professional sports because their stadiums are built with love not putting lipstick on a pig because politically it is better saying they built a 500 million dollar stadium than admitting it is really 200 million with 300 million worth of waste or greasing the wheels of donors who supported the stadium.

-Moneyball is propoganda and Bill James have been proven over and over his philosophy cannot win a championship.

I disagree about moneyball being propaganda and bill James philosophy not winning a championship. Analytics are not going anywhere. An early adopter of analytics was the Red Sox, who won a few championships. Maybe the A's problem is when they had a competitive advantage they should have maybe kept it low-key instead of writing books and making movies about it. That just encouraged other teams, whose owners were not cheapskates to use analytics.

 

[catman]

Billy Beane said that analytics doesn't work in the playoffs. It does, however, help get you to the playoffs.
I'm sort of "old-school" and played in an era where you stole bases, bunted and where strike outs were not good. I guess this is because I didn't have a lot of power and could run pretty well. I had decent bat control and strike-zone judgement.

 

[DT LUNA]

They better keep the Athletics name... It started in Philly in 1901 and survived the move to KC in '54 and Oakland in '67... I can't imagine them changing the name.

I wouldn't mind if they got rid of the green...

And call them the "Gamblers"

 

[wazzu31]

I disagree about moneyball being propaganda and bill James philosophy not winning a championship. Analytics are not going anywhere. An early adopter of analytics was the Red Sox, who won a few championships. Maybe the A's problem is when they had a competitive advantage they should have maybe kept it low-key instead of writing books and making movies about it. That just encouraged other teams, whose owners were not cheapskates to use analytics.

Will massively disagree with Bill James’ philosophy ever winning a championship. There has never been a team that has won a championship that’s philosophy was Bill James.
You can try to argue that the 2004 Red Sox adopted Moneyball but that is 100% false. The Moneyball people they claim were the dudes who filled out the roster. And Bill James would’ve rolled over in his grave had Dave Roberts been on that team. Dave Roberts skills is why Bill James didn’t accomplish shit in the game. Any team who has ever won since free agency has blended between his philosophy and the Steinbrenner led Yankees philosophy of just buying talent.

But mostly I was speaking on the movie moneyball was 100% propoganda. You watch the movie and realize the old school scouts in the beginning of the movie were right. The Moneyball dudes played good for 20 something games and none of the actual good players were even shown. You didn’t see the MVP, the Cy Young winner (plus the other 2 caliber guys) damn near ROTY, nearly the closer of the year. I love Hatteberg cause he is a Coug but the team wasn’t good because he had a clutch home run during a winning streak and was the 4th best 1B in the division.

 

[broncosmitty]

Bill James isn’t dead.

 

[broncosmitty]

Will massively disagree with Bill James’ philosophy ever winning a championship. There has never been a team that has won a championship that’s philosophy was Bill James.
You can try to argue that the 2004 Red Sox adopted Moneyball but that is 100% false. The Moneyball people they claim were the dudes who filled out the roster. And Bill James would’ve rolled over in his grave had Dave Roberts been on that team. Dave Roberts skills is why Bill James didn’t accomplish shit in the game. Any team who has ever won since free agency has blended between his philosophy and the Steinbrenner led Yankees philosophy of just buying talent.

But mostly I was speaking on the movie moneyball was 100% propoganda. You watch the movie and realize the old school scouts in the beginning of the movie were right. The Moneyball dudes played good for 20 something games and none of the actual good players were even shown. You didn’t see the MVP, the Cy Young winner (plus the other 2 caliber guys) damn near ROTY, nearly the closer of the year. I love Hatteberg cause he is a Coug but the team wasn’t good because he had a clutch home run during a winning streak and was the 4th best 1B in the division.

I’ve never read the book. But the movie is fucking garbage. For all the reasons you stated.

And especially for the disrespect of Art Howe. And the complete absence of BalCo.

 

[calsnowskier]

Bill James isn’t dead.

He would roll over in his grave if he heard anyone claim he was.

 

[wazzu31]

I’ve never read the book. But the movie is fucking garbage. For all the reasons you stated.

And especially for the disrespect of Art Howe. And the complete absence of BalCo.

Kind of my main gripe is the movie. And fans fell for it afterward instead of realizing all these sabermetrics were always in baseball but were just normal lexicon.

WAR is about the only thing that wasn’t a part of baseball because just as sabermatricians can’t agree on what WAR actually is, much like a MVP. Have any Moneyball person ask a 60 year old baseball fan and they will explain the same thing with different words. Minor example, exit velo is just a hard hit ball, but a 60 year old could ask an analytics guy on how to get a run and the analytics guy will say you can get one by hitting a home run or getting a walk then have the next hitter hit a home run.

 

[broncosmitty]

Kind of my main gripe is the movie. And fans fell for it afterward instead of realizing all these sabermetrics were always in baseball but were just normal lexicon.

WAR is about the only thing that wasn’t a part of baseball because just as sabermatricians can’t agree on what WAR actually is, much like a MVP. Have any Moneyball person ask a 60 year old baseball fan and they will explain the same thing with different words. Minor example, exit velo is just a hard hit ball, but a 60 year old could ask an analytics guy on how to get a run and the analytics guy will say you can get one by hitting a home run or getting a walk then have the next hitter hit a home run.

Yeah, it’s like people woke up one day and forgot they were taught to be a patient hitter from the time they were four.

I don’t get it.

 

[wazzu31]

So what is going on with the team, are they relocating or not? Does Fisher have the money to move or even keep the team?