MODS PLEASE LOCK - MLB 2007 Season Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've been a Sox fan since the day I was born, and I know all about losing as I followed the Hartford Whalers since they were here in CT, so I know all about losing. I hope the Sox make the World Series but I wouldn't be mad at them if they lost to the Rockies considering the streak they have going.

With that said...

fuck THE YANKEES! BOOYAH!

But for some reason I think Torre is going to keep his job. Georgey said the same thing a few years ago and they end up keeping him. He's the best man for the job, and Georgey will soon find that out.
 
[quote name='Xevious']I'm an Indians fan but I actually like the Red Sox. I was rooting for them when they won the World Series a few years ago. I don't think their fans are as bad as some people on this thread made them out to be.

Still, I take the Indians over anyone anyday. Its time for the Tribe to go all the way. I know its going be a great series coming up between Boston and Cleveland.[/QUOTE]

I think the feeling is mutual. Most of the Red Sox fans don't have a problem with any of the other teams except the Yankees. I enjoy watching the Indians, as I do the Rockies. There are going to be some great series coming up, and I'll be watching the WS no matter which combination of teams are playing.
 
I have a feeling that financially speaking, this will be a terrible playoff for baseball. But I guess when you're handing off games to TBS, that's kind of expected.

Imagine if the Angels had managed to win, and it was a CS of Cleveland, Anaheim, Colorado, and Arizona. Yikes.

Hopefully the Indians won't make the one time I'm rooting for them in vain and at least get to the WS. But as was the case last year, even if the NL sucks, they can still win somehow.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']The Sox make money. They own 80% of the network that carries their games (NESN), which draws the highest ratings of any team in Baseball. They own Fenway Sports Group, which handles advertising at other events (which is now very profitable), and they own half of Roush Racing. These are people that know how to make a buck. They're a private company, so they don't disclose their financial data.

The value of the team went from $339 million in 2001 to $724 million this year, if that says anything. Here's what Forbes has on them:
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/33/07mlb_Boston-Red-Sox_330700.html[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the link, but let me say that value looks to be one of the more useless measures in that table. It shows what the team is worth if they're to be sold, but nothing more than that, really.

The next two charts are far more interesting to me, really. More operating income than revenue as well. For 2007 (this must be an estimate, since the page was written back in early April), operating income is defined as "Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization." The Red Sox, based on that chart, have had three profitable seasons since 1999, then. This year they appear to be estimated to have a $20 million profit. That profit is almost single-handedly attributable to the increase in revenue (duh, I suppose) that is estimated as being $28 million higher this year than last year. Given an estimated $20 million income, then, without that growth, they'd be having another year of negative income (though $10m less than 2006).

They're luckier than the Yankees in some regard (check out their page), but saying "The Red Sox make money" is not true. They make some money sometimes, but summing up all the years from 2000 on, they're in the red.
 
Welll crap. I guess Cleveland was the better team this week (but I still won't admit they were a better overall team than the Yankees for the season). They deserve to move on though - they out played the Yanks. Here's hoping they can beat up on the Red Sox now.
 
[quote name='javeryh']Welll crap. I guess Cleveland was the better team this week (but I still won't admit they were a better overall team than the Yankees for the season). They deserve to move on though - they out played the Yanks. Here's hoping they can beat up on the Red Sox now.[/quote]That's one of the reasons that I don't really follow baseball until late August. So much can change so fast by a team going on a winning or losing streak because there are so many games that nothing really matters till we get close to the playoffs. Basketball is the same way.

That's on reason I really like football more--with fewer games each game means a lot more.
 
[quote name='javeryh']Welll crap. I guess Cleveland was the better team this week (but I still won't admit they were a better overall team than the Yankees for the season). They deserve to move on though - they out played the Yanks. Here's hoping they can beat up on the Red Sox now.[/QUOTE]

MLB will never admit it or change a thing due to the loss in revenue, but the one thing that the NFL has really got over MLB is that *EVERY* game matters. There are too few of them not to. In baseball, though, that is sadly not the case - the September chase for the pennant is really the only time this is the case (or, the September relinquishing of the pennant if you're a Met).

Also as far as seasonlong trends are concerned, I no longer follow them, but the A's Billy Beane method of recruiting (in short: hooray for statisticians and to hell with the scouts!) led to them having the 3rd lowest payroll in MLB, along with one of the highest win/loss records over the season. It's an absolutely brilliant philosophy (dunno if they still follow it though), but because it's so rooted in statistics, probabilities, and averages, it only shows itself to be fruitful in the long term. For them, they can prove themselves time and time again over 162 games, but this is also the reason that they get smoked by superior teams in the post season whenever they get there.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The next two charts are far more interesting to me, really. More operating income than revenue as well. For 2007 (this must be an estimate, since the page was written back in early April), operating income is defined as "Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization." The Red Sox, based on that chart, have had three profitable seasons since 1999, then. This year they appear to be estimated to have a $20 million profit. That profit is almost single-handedly attributable to the increase in revenue (duh, I suppose) that is estimated as being $28 million higher this year than last year. Given an estimated $20 million income, then, without that growth, they'd be having another year of negative income (though $10m less than 2006).

I didn't look at the charts or any of that, but I wonder if those estimates at the begining of the season took in to account the revenue from japan that they didn't have before. I know that either henry or werner were on weei during spring training and they felt they could get the $50 mill posting fee back in year 1 with the new revenue stream coming from japan. A tv deal and merchandise were the major contributors to this. I also don't know if those numbers reflect the fact that the primary owners of the redsox own the majority of land surrounding fenway. Over the past 5 or so years it has really cleaned up. They own the majority of parking lots, which cost have tripled in the past few years. Since I didn't look at the forbes article, I couldn't tell you, but I would doubt that income would be included in the redsox bottom line.
Click to expand...
 
The radio deal was mentioned, going from $8 to $15 million, give or take. The parking lot was not mentioned, and shouldn't be, as the ownership is incidental. It's like saying that the Red Sox are making money because of the increase in hotel rates around Fenway. It's indirectly true (Red Sox success during the season means more people stay in the hotels), but that money isn't part of the Red Sox' income. It's the hotels' income. Same with parking.

Seems rather...monopolistic, I think, to have baseball team ownership owning the majority of parking spots around a ballpark, only to have prices suddenly triple. Yet another reason to own a bicycle.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']The radio deal was mentioned, going from $8 to $15 million, give or take. The parking lot was not mentioned, and shouldn't be, as the ownership is incidental. It's like saying that the Red Sox are making money because of the increase in hotel rates around Fenway. It's indirectly true (Red Sox success during the season means more people stay in the hotels), but that money isn't part of the Red Sox' income. It's the hotels' income. Same with parking.

Seems rather...monopolistic, I think, to have baseball team ownership owning the majority of parking spots around a ballpark, only to have prices suddenly triple. Yet another reason to own a bicycle.[/QUOTE]

If they own the parking lots, and sell tickets right alongside the seat tickets, why should it be incidental? The only way you make money off that land is events at the stadium. There shouldn't be any reason why it wouldn't be included in the income statement.

The Braves own the main parking lot outside Turner Field (where Atlanta-Fulton County used to be), sell parking passes through the website, and it was included with the sale of the team. I see no reason why Fenway/FPG would be any different.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']If they own the parking lots, and sell tickets right alongside the seat tickets, why should it be incidental? The only way you make money off that land is events at the stadium. There shouldn't be any reason why it wouldn't be included in the income statement.

The Braves own the main parking lot outside Turner Field (where Atlanta-Fulton County used to be), sell parking passes through the website, and it was included with the sale of the team. I see no reason why Fenway/FPG would be any different.[/QUOTE]

I suppose you're right about that, but it's more ambiguous than either of us has stated, I think (if you differentiate b/w parking lots that are, say, underneath the stadium and those that are multipurpose).
 
[quote name='jousley']Actually...they WERE...right place at the right time...they have the rings and trophy to prove it. Don't diss teams if you are a Yankees fan and only think that Cash=Wins.[/quote]
i hate to break it to you, but in the yankees case, cash DOES equal wins. and the red sox have a grossly high payroll too and everyone cuts them slack. if you know a team that has been more consistent than the yankees the past 10 years, let me know

and the 2 national league teams suck, i dont think its fun to watch 2 teams with random no-name players pulled out of their ass, no matter how hard they play. esp. when those teams are good once every 10 years or so.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']i hate to break it to you, but in the yankees case, cash DOES equal wins. and the red sox have a grossly high payroll too and everyone cuts them slack. if you know a team that has been more consistent than the yankees the past 10 years, let me know

and the 2 national league teams suck, i dont think its fun to watch 2 teams with random no-name players pulled out of their ass, no matter how hard they play. esp. when those teams are good once every 10 years or so.[/quote]Comments like these are why it's so sweet every time the Yankees get their comeuppance.
 
[quote name='Genocidal']Comments like these are why it's so sweet every time the Yankees get their comeuppance.[/QUOTE]


Yup. And in Yankee land suck=do better than us, apparently.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']i hate to break it to you, but in the yankees case, cash DOES equal wins. and the red sox have a grossly high payroll too and everyone cuts them slack. if you know a team that has been more consistent than the yankees the past 10 years, let me know[/quote]
The Devil Rays. They've probably been a more consistant team than the Yankees.
 
yeah i was suprised by the pass several yankee hitters are getting...my good college buddy is always going on and on about mr clutch, derek jeter about how he gets a hit when they needed it. Well he had several opportunities to get hits that would have helped them in the series vs clevand and came up short, but no one mentions it.
 
I hate the Yankees but Jeter is generally a clutch playoff hitter. So what if he had one bad postseason, that just means it was time for someone else to step up.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']and the 2 national league teams suck, i dont think its fun to watch 2 teams with random no-name players pulled out of their ass, no matter how hard they play. esp. when those teams are good once every 10 years or so.[/quote]You do know that in order for a player to become a known-name player, that they have to start as a no-name and prove themselves, right?

I love the Yankee fan mentality. "Yeah, we lost, whatever. Everyone else sucks and we're still #1!" We'll see ya in April I guess.
 
[quote name='daroga']You do know that in order for a player to become a known-name player, that they have to start as a no-name and prove themselves, right?

I love the Yankee fan mentality. "Yeah, we lost, whatever. Everyone else sucks and we're still #1!" We'll see ya in April I guess.[/quote]
What do you expect from a Yankees fan? They don't pay for no-names. ;)

I saw this amusing quote on Todd Zuniga's blog:

"C.C.'s a big kid. He throws hard," Red Sox infielder Alex Cora said. "Carmona has a Nintendo sinker. He throws hard, too."
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
On ESPN.com theres also a article where Rivera talks about not coming back if Torre isn't re-signed. Looking at his career stats he's had his worst year since he was a rookie. I wonder if he's finally losing his stuff since he's getting older, and if he's worth re-signing, especially since they got Jaba now.

Within the next seven days we'll know if A-Rod is staying a Yankee or not to. That was posted yesterday as he supposedly had 10 days to make his decision.

BTW, what the hell is a Nintendo sinker?
 
I think it is 10 or 15 days after the world series...

jaba is allegedly targeted as the #3 starter next year..

I would assume the nintendo sinker is in reference to rbi baseball, and how the curve would bounce at the plate...but it looked good untill an inch or so before the plate
 
[quote name='mykevermin']They're luckier than the Yankees in some regard (check out their page), but saying "The Red Sox make money" is not true. They make some money sometimes, but summing up all the years from 2000 on, they're in the red.[/QUOTE]
Thats the team only, that does not include their other businesses, such as NESN. They keep as many revenue streams separate from the team as possible, since they'd lose 40% of it to revenue sharing if it fell under the 'team' umbrella.

The Yankees do a similar thing with the YES network, which they own. They were in hot water with the league last year for having YES pay almost no rights fee to the Yankees, to avoid revenue sharing on almost all of their TV money.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']as much as I love the sox, imo if the indian bats show up, I think clevand will take it in 7 games.[/QUOTE]

That is if the bats show up. Right now the Rockies should be more feared. If the Sox make the WS and face the Rockies It's going to be REAL tough. Infact, right now those bats are doing pretty well against the Diamond Backs, and that's against their #1 pitcher. The Rockies are fucking brutal man.
 
[quote name='yukine']What the fuck were they booing about anyway? I left the room, and then I come back to see shit getting thrown on the field.[/quote]

I guess the Baby Backs need a nap since they're throwing a tantrum! ;)
 
[quote name='Monsta Mack']That is if the bats show up. Right now the Rockies should be more feared. If the Sox make the WS and face the Rockies It's going to be REAL tough. Infact, right now those bats are doing pretty well against the Diamond Backs, and that's against their #1 pitcher. The Rockies are fucking brutal man.[/QUOTE]
Either NL team would get slaughtered by either AL team. The level of talent in the AL is that much better.
 
[quote name='Chitown021']I guess the Baby Backs need a nap since they're throwing a tantrum! ;)[/quote]

Still haven't gotten over that sweep? :lol:
 
[quote name='yukine']Still haven't gotten over that sweep? :lol:[/quote]

Oh, I'm still mildly perturbed about it. I didn't really appreciate the cocky attitude the D-Backs had after the final game and the saddest part is how little the fans in Arizona care. The Cubs set a new record for attendance this year while the D-Backs barely had a sellout. Look how many Cubs fans bought tickets for those first two games in the series at AZ.

Seems somewhat unfair that a team with such little support gets to advance while the other with phenomenal attendance all year and such a hunger for a championship goes home.
 
[quote name='Chitown021']Oh, I'm still mildly perturbed about it. I didn't really appreciate the cocky attitude the D-Backs had after the final game and the saddest part is how little the fans in Arizona care. The Cubs set a new record for attendance this year while the D-Backs barely had a sellout. Look how many Cubs fans bought tickets for those first two games in the series at AZ.

Seems somewhat unfair that a team with such little support gets to advance while the other with phenomenal attendance all year and such a hunger for a championship goes home.[/quote]
Such is life, buddy. Don't let it get you down.

And the reason for such low attendance is because there are many Chicago and some Boston transplants out here in Arizona that refuse to grow up and watch a baseball game without their team.
 
LOL. I guess the one positive thing about this year was the Cubs didn't tease us. We didn't have a NLCS heartbreaking meltdown like in 2003 (I still feel bad for Bartman and don't blame the dude one bit. The Cubs had plenty of opportunities to get out of the inning. Unlike Cardinals fans that still blame Deckenger for losing the 85' series to the Royals).
 
[quote name='Chitown021']Oh, I'm still mildly perturbed about it. I didn't really appreciate the cocky attitude the D-Backs had after the final game and the saddest part is how little the fans in Arizona care. The Cubs set a new record for attendance this year while the D-Backs barely had a sellout. Look how many Cubs fans bought tickets for those first two games in the series at AZ.

Seems somewhat unfair that a team with such little support gets to advance while the other with phenomenal attendance all year and such a hunger for a championship goes home.[/QUOTE]

Also see the Marlins when they won the World Series so many moons ago.

Cubs fans are fanatical enough that they would take the megabus to Cincinnati for the games there, and easily outnumber the fair-weather fuckers in this city. :lol:

I still don't think that fan support is an indication of "deserving" or "undeserving," though.
 
And the Diamondbacks are playing awful, hopefully they will get their act together tomorrow.

If not, well... better the Rockies than say... the Padres.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Also see the Marlins when they won the World Series so many moons ago.

Cubs fans are fanatical enough that they would take the megabus to Cincinnati for the games there, and easily outnumber the fair-weather fuckers in this city. :lol:

I still don't think that fan support is an indication of "deserving" or "undeserving," though.[/quote]


How about getting kicked in our collective sack for 100 years. Does that make us deserving of a WS title? :lol:


EDIT: Oh that's what the D-Backs were upset about... Upton intetionally tried to take out Matsui so the ump called the double play. Looked like a good call to me. Upton slid past the bag and went out of his way (see turning his shoulder right into Kaz).
 
[quote name='dafoomie']Either NL team would get slaughtered by either AL team. The level of talent in the AL is that much better.[/quote]

qft...neither NL team, IMO, has the depth of pitching to make it thru a 7 game series (don't think it would go that long) with either bos or cle...Maybe if the yanks or angels were in the world series I would think differently, but cle and boston have really good rotations. Besides the aces of either team, I don't think any of the remaining starters would make the starting rotation on bos or clev.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Also see the Marlins when they won the World Series so many moons ago.[/quote]Bah, that was obnoxious. They bought a team that year, beat the Indians, and promptly got rid of most of the talent.

Great. :p
 
[quote name='dafoomie']Either NL team would get slaughtered by either AL team. The level of talent in the AL is that much better.[/QUOTE]

Not quite.

It's rumored that Big Papi and Manny want to play some guitar hero if they make the World Series, and that Josh will be overseeing this magicificent duel, and will take on the winner. In the mean team everyone will complain of sore shoulders and they will suck in the World Series.

 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']So the ALCS is going to be on Fox now while NLCS is on TBS?[/quote]

I wonder if none of the big networks wanted to carry the NLCS...maybe it didn't pull in high enough ratings compared to the ALCS, and hence tbs was able to pick it up. I know the world series numbers were really low last year, which is what happens when 2 teams with small/mid size tv markets and low national fanbase play each other.
 
I guess Fox thinks so little of America that they'll not broadcast the National Anthem, the giant flag over the monster, the soldiers on the field, or the flyover, and instead show John Kruk and some commercials. Nice priorities, Fox! Now I'll switch over to your news channel where they'll tell me I'm not patriotic enough.
 
[quote name='ryanbph']I wonder if none of the big networks wanted to carry the NLCS...maybe it didn't pull in high enough ratings compared to the ALCS, and hence tbs was able to pick it up. I know the world series numbers were really low last year, which is what happens when 2 teams with small/mid size tv markets and low national fanbase play each other.[/quote]
Maybe, though I guess it depends on how early this stuff's decided.

Hafner homers on Beckett early!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top