And it speaks to our priorities as a society. And I love the sport of baseball, but this sort of thing is a turn-off.
Angels extend Mike Trout for 12 years, $430 million
- Thread starter Lion8286
- Start date
Certainly the Union has pushed under the belief that each new mega contract raises all boats. That is out the window now as you see guys getting squeezed hard. Teams have a budget and attempt to avoid the perils of the luxury tax. So, mega contracts largely mean that the Harper’s and Trouts will set salary records at the expense of the rank and file as they will be squeezed to fit within a salary budget.
Manny had said earlier that he DIDNT want the West Coast but he followed the money. Manny strongly preferred NY over everyone else as did Harper. The Yankees simply have changed the way they did business.
CA is a horrible place to pay for tax purposes as well but I do think that quality of life is still something to consider.
What marketing issues and commissioners opinions? I'd be shocked if I missed the story where Manfred said he'd prefer to have Trout out of the #2 media market.
Yeah a lot more people watched the the Yankees and Red Sox than the angels this year. They have a lot more fans and a much better team. But virtually none of those people were tuning in to see Judge or Betts- they want to watch the team. Conversely, no one would be watching the Angels if Trout wasn't around. So from a league perspective, they're much better off having their best player in the #2 media market and drawing eye balls to his team instead of playing on teams that are already near or at max viewership
You must have been on vacation. . .
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2018/07/17/mike-trout-mlb-marketing/793265002/
That says Mike Trout can be a bigger star if he wants to be, not 'MLB would prefer if Trout played on the East coast'
Your question was "What marketing issues and commissioners opinions?". So I link an article on the marketing issues and commissioner's opinions and now, on your very next post, you change the argument. Hilarious, but typical of some on this board.
Why are say the Mets, Yankees, Cubs, and Red Sox at “max viewership”? How do you know what their maximum TV share is? If the Yankees added Trout and reached the same market share as the Red Sox, the increase in total household viewing as a result would dwarf the current household viewing audience generated by the Angels. The Angels actual physical attendance is off roughly 10% from the peak attendance prior to Trout starting his career and some of the attendance and viewership last year was likely generated by Ohtani more so than Trout.
People go to see and watch winning teams. The Angels don’t have a good product. Their team is old and not productive. Ohtani and Trout with a wonderful SS. The rest of the team had players like Upton, Albert, and Kinsler last year. Horrible.
You are truly dense, but I'll try one more time. Here is the history of the argument since you can't keep up:
Mr. Tailgate: MLB had to be hoping that he would play in a better baseball town or in one of the usual markets where you would see him play routinely before midnight each night. And it’s another bad spot for the game when it’s most marketable player isn’t the face of the game.
Me: Mike Trout is the face of the game regardless of what city he plays in. I truly doubt that MLB is upset that their best player is staying in the US's 2nd biggest TV market. And considering the #2, #3, #5, #7 and #8 TV markets are not in the eastern time zone, there are plenty of people watching Mike Trout play baseball before midnight.
Mr. Tailgate: The marketing issues and the commissioner’s opinions around Trout are well chronicled.
Me: What marketing issues and commissioners opinions? I'd be shocked if I missed the story where Manfred said he'd prefer to have Trout out of the #2 media market.
You then posted an article where Manfred said 'Mike Trout can be a much bigger star if he wants to be' which proves my point that he does not need to be on I95 to be the face of the game. Manfred did not say 'Mike Trout can be a much bigger star if he goes to Philly/NYC/Boston' because that's a very shortsighted view of the world and ignores the fact that Trout's personality would not change if he moved to a different city.
No point including the Mets in this discussion, they're a debacle.
People watch the Yankees, Red Sox and Cubs because they are fans of those teams. They don't tune in to see one individual player. The majority of people who do not watch those teams, especially the Yanks and Sox, don't watch them because they dislike or even hate them. Adding Trout to either team isn't going to change that, it would actually reinforce many of those people's opinions of the teams. Meanwhile, as you say, there is no reason to watch the Angels other than Trout. So if you take the most marketable player off a team in the #2 media market, I don't think the marginal increase in viewers the Yankees or Red Sox gain offsets the loss of Angels viewers, and thus, MLB loses viewers. Look at attendance from last year: http://www.espn.com/mlb/attendance/_/year/2018/sort/homeTotal
The Angels were 6th in total home, 9th in % home. Every team higher than them finished above .500, Angels did not. Angels filled 82% of their seats, Phillies filled 63% and they had the same record. Yankees, Cubs and Red Sox already in the top 5. So again- the marginal gain of Trout there doesn't offset the massive loss of eyeballs the Angels experience
Drink enough beer, and all female patrons at a bowling alley will appear attractive.
You very well may be right. I just think that once you sign a 300-400M contract, you're quality of life is taken care of, regardless of where you live. After all, Trout resides outside of Philadelphia and Bryce resides on the west coast, despite where they'll be playing for the long haul (so it seems).
My guess is the first billion dollar contract will go to an individual sport athlete, most likely if a boxer can come along , the likes of a Mayweather and sign a 10-20 fight deal. And that is long odds, you are taking a big swing if you think a championship fighter can go 20 straight.
Last one. The Angels have a horrible cable market share even with the game’s best player. Their household viewing audience still ranks somewhat high which is basically what you are saying given the size of their overall market but they aren’t much more than say Seattle. Most would look at the household viewing numbers and say that they aren’t much more than Seattle, Minnesota, St Louis, etc which are locales that pale in size comparison to Anaheim.
The Mets are really the BEST comparable since they are the second team little brother in their market similar to the Angels in their respective market relative to the Dodgers. And the Mets household viewing cable audience dwarfs that of the Angels. The West Coast will never simply care enough relative to the East Coast. Trout will be an all timer, but Judge will be more recognizable, more popular, and be a bigger brand if he continues his arc.
I think at the end of the day, we both know that the East Coast magnifies everything relative to the West Coast. Reggie was never really Reggie until he hit NY. Trout will be an all timer but his profile will never match his skill level as long as he toils in Anaheim.
Maybe he is smart enough to realize that having a profile that matches his skill level is not necessarily a positive. It's not like he needs to make more money with commercials, after all. On the east coast, he'd be a super-mega-star with that contract. In LA, he's still a super-mega-star, but there are a lot of them out there. Perhaps he feels that a bit less glare is not a bad thing.
Read the Rob Manfred article- Mike Trout's proflie doesn't fit his skill level because he doesn't want it to. It doesnt have anything to do with the market. Again, LA is a pretty big place. Reggie Jackson is 72 years old and played for the yankees 40 years ago. We now have ESPN, MLB network, Iphones, Twitter, Instagram and MLB Extra Innings. Time to adjust your world view
Did you ever read Ball Four? that was a dagger to the heart of a 15 year old at the time. But then I grew up and reality set in.
Hey Lurker - I just wanted to ensure that you were aware that our favorite Italian Restaurant has re-opened. I couldn’t find a place to park there yesterday at lunch time!
As I get older, I love these time "reset" messages. I heard one yesterday: 18 year old kids signing up for military service weren't alive on 9-11. Amazing.
Hey, I saw that and thought of you! I drove by the other day and the parking lot was overflowing. I don't think I ever saw it that crowded before, so I guess a lot of people are glad to see them back online. It was even full around back.
Were you wacking balls at Pine Creek at all recently? Things have really picked up there.
Haven’t been to Pine Creek lately. Although PC is closer to home, I have been practicing at PA Golf Academy on their indoor simulator. Now that the weather is changing, I’ll be hitting PC more frequently (and Bell’s)!
