Fangraphs: Why a Mid-Market Team Can't Sign Players to Long Contracts

[Fuzzball22]

Whether or not you like it, the Washington metro area has more than twice as many households as Baltimore, and is surely more wealthy. Yes, the O's have a temporary advantage in the RSN situation with MASN, but in the end Baltimore is about the same market size as Nashville and Sacramento.

My argument with small market mid market is that (using your examples) Nashville and Sacramento are not drawing from any other top 50 markets. The Orioles are drawing from Harrisburg/York/Lancaster the number 45 market. No doubt the competition for fans in MD, PA, DC, VA is tough with 3 teams within 90 miles or so. But there is a huge population for those 3 teams to draw from. Minneapolis/St. Paul comes in at number 15. How big a circle would you have to draw to capture the population within 100 miles of Baltimore? Because we rank number 26 doesn't make us small.

[JLee2027]

By the logic of this article, we shouldn't have extended Adam Jones.

Peter Angelos loves his insurance.

[MrOrange82]

Is this supposed to be ironic? Jones signed his extension for 2013-18. By the end of '15 he'll have been paid $35M and will have been worth about 14 or 15 wins, or between $98M and $105M. He's been worth more in the first three years of his deal than the entire deal is paying him. It's a massive value, and I don't see any reason to think he's on the verge of a big fall. Jones has been worth 3+ wins each of the last five seasons. The idea that the O's could have let him go to free agency and simply and easily found $100M in value for $35M elsewhere seems pretty ludicrous to me.

Oh... top dollar? The last year of Jones' deal is $17M. The biggest contracts in baseball are now $30M or so. Jones deal is paying for 2 or 2.5 wins a year.

Need to spread rep. Not that you're running low or anything. But man...on the list of Things that Could Be Orioles Problems, AJ's contract has to be dead last, if it appears at all.

[MemorialStadKid]

According to this metric we're in the 4th highest market:

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/articles/baseball_markets.shtml

But then in terms of direct market size we're 20th:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Baseball_Bugs/population

I've always believed that Angelos could spend A LOT more than his normal budgets let on. However, I don't like the idea you don't hold onto your core.

You've got to have a solid group of guys to build around for their productive years - maybe 5-6 year deals signed at the age of 22-26. Then you trade them toward the end of their deals for high-end prospects provided your vet has "star" quality. You keep cycling in strong prospects via international development and drafts but you've got to have that star core to build around. A core of proven talent who produce what you need year after year.

Baltimore is not a microscopic market.

MSK

[weams]

According to this metric we're in the 4th highest market:

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/articles/baseball_markets.shtml

But then in terms of direct market size we're 20th:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Baseball_Bugs/population

I've always believed that Angelos could spend A LOT more than his normal budgets let on. However, I don't like the idea you don't hold onto your core.

You've got to have a solid group of guys to build around for their productive years - maybe 5-6 year deals signed at the age of 22-26. Then you trade them toward the end of their deals for high-end prospects provided your vet has "star" quality. You keep cycling in strong prospects via international development and drafts but you've got to have that star core to build around. A core of proven talent who produce what you need year after year.

Baltimore is not a microscopic market.

MSK

Even with your data it shows that the Orioles share and market and if divided, would sit right in the middle of these.

2,968,806 Minnesota Twins

2,945,831 Cleveland Indians

2,813,833 San Diego Padres

2,603,607 St Louis Cardinals

2,581,506 Colorado Rockies

2,395,997 Tampa Bay Devil Rays

2,358,695 Pittsburgh Pirates

2,265,223 Portland, OR (NBA)

By the way, notice something? Very stale data if they are still called Devil Rays. Only Patrick has done that since 2001.

[MemorialStadKid]

Even with your data it shows that the Orioles share and market and if divided, would sit right in the middle of these.

2,968,806 Minnesota Twins

2,945,831 Cleveland Indians

2,813,833 San Diego Padres

2,603,607 St Louis Cardinals

2,581,506 Colorado Rockies

2,395,997 Tampa Bay Devil Rays

2,358,695 Pittsburgh Pirates

2,265,223 Portland, OR (NBA)

By the way, notice something? Very stale data if they are still called Devil Rays. Only Patrick has done that since 2001.

I did notice that, however, hasn't the Metro-Baltimore region grown in population?

I wonder if there's a tangible way to measure the percentage of the population within the region who are actually Orioles fans (in terms of live TV viewing, money spent on tix and season plans, who regularly follow the team closely)? I know there are MASN metrics, but they can be skewed against people who favor radio and internet streaming options.

I've always wondered if Baltimore was closer to Oakland's market share or Minnesota's?

MSK

[Nigel Tufnel]

I did notice that, however, hasn't the Metro-Baltimore region grown in population?

I wonder if there's a tangible way to measure the percentage of the population within the region who are actually Orioles fans (in terms of live TV viewing, money spent on tix and season plans, who regularly follow the team closely)? I know there are MASN metrics, but they can be skewed against people who favor radio and internet streaming options.

I've always wondered if Baltimore was closer to Oakland's market share or Minnesota's?

MSK

You don't understand how TV rights fees work. And that's where the money is, at least for now.

It doesn't matter how many Orioles fans there are in the region, or how many games they watch. MASN gets money for every single person in the market who has a cable/satellite package containing MASN, regardless of whether they know anything about baseball or not. This is the entire reason that MASN exists in the first place, so the O's would collect rights fees from the larger Washington market.

But MASN has to divide the money between two teams. And since MASN needs to split the money evenly, it makes sense to divide the size of the market in half. MASN doesn't make the Orioles large market; it just prevents them from being small market.

[weams]

I know there are MASN metrics, but they can be skewed against people who favor radio and internet streaming options.

MSK

Only a guy who tries to sell vapor-ware spouts that. Again, that is not true.

[weams]

You don't understand how TV rights fees work. And that's where the money is, at least for now.

It doesn't matter how many Orioles fans there are in the region, or how many games they watch. MASN gets money for every single person in the market who has a cable/satellite package containing MASN, regardless of whether they know anything about baseball or not. This is the entire reason that MASN exists in the first place, so the O's would collect rights fees from the larger Washington market.

But MASN has to divide the money between two teams. And since MASN needs to split the money evenly, it makes sense to divide the size of the market in half. MASN doesn't make the Orioles large market; it just prevents them from being small market.

Thank you for explaining in a clear, concise, understandable, and factual way.

[DrungoHazewood]

It doesn't matter how many Orioles fans there are in the region, or how many games they watch. MASN gets money for every single person in the market who has a cable/satellite package containing MASN, regardless of whether they know anything about baseball or not. This is the entire reason that MASN exists in the first place, so the O's would collect rights fees from the larger Washington market.

And... this is why the whole thing will eventually collapse. It's silly enough that the RSNs get to collect money from folks who don't care about baseball. But MASN gets to collect money from non-baseball fans who aren't even in the Orioles' market and wouldn't root for them anyway, and funnel that money to the Orioles. Because it's not fair that some other team came in and stole all that revenue from people who aren't watching the Orioles.

[Nigel Tufnel]

And... this is why the whole thing will eventually collapse. It's silly enough that the RSNs get to collect money from folks who don't care about baseball. But MASN gets to collect money from non-baseball fans who aren't even in the Orioles' market and wouldn't root for them anyway, and funnel that money to the Orioles. Because it's not fair that some other team came in and stole all that revenue from people who aren't watching the Orioles.

Yep, a la carte is already beginning, so the thing primarily responsible for keeping the O's from being small market is eventually going to crash and burn, probably sooner rather than later. Meanwhile, unless the O's get the MASN decision overturned (unlikely, IMO) they owe the Nats something like $100M, and also lose tens of millions in annual revenue each year going forward. But, hey, Angelos is old and rich, so spend?

[MemorialStadKid]

You don't understand how TV rights fees work. And that's where the money is, at least for now.

It doesn't matter how many Orioles fans there are in the region, or how many games they watch. MASN gets money for every single person in the market who has a cable/satellite package containing MASN, regardless of whether they know anything about baseball or not. This is the entire reason that MASN exists in the first place, so the O's would collect rights fees from the larger Washington market.

But MASN has to divide the money between two teams. And since MASN needs to split the money evenly, it makes sense to divide the size of the market in half. MASN doesn't make the Orioles large market; it just prevents them from being small market.

You're correct, I don't - which is why I posted some data to develop an understanding.

1) From what I've been raised to understand about profits is that you put in less money and hope the money you bring in is more than your initial investment.

2) I believed that market size meant that you had potential access to a certain amount of consumers with disposable income who would be interested in your product. Hence, Frostburg, MD has a much smaller market size than Brooklyn, NY.

3) The number of Orioles fans within the region who spend money on tickets and other ancillary products should be greater than the operating costs and that leads to a greater profit. Said profit is then spun around on marketing, overhead and payroll flexibility.

4) I don't really get what's going on with MASN. I thought the Nationals had to pay Angelos fees for being on MASN and also had to pay for the right to move into the Balto-Wash market to begin with.

Bottom line for me is understanding the justification for our budgets if the market size suggests more could be spent in the long run.

MSK

[MemorialStadKid]

Only a guy who tries to sell vapor-ware spouts that. Again, that is not true.

I wasn't suggesting this was the truth, Sorry if it came off that way. I do know how ratings work for TV and it goes like this:

1) Live (watching it when it is broadcast)

2) Live+3 (watching it within three days of broadcast)

3) Live+7 (watching it withing seven days of broadcast)

That's what I meant when I said metrics can be skewed. There's a big issue in Hollywood regarding ratings from live vs. DVR vs. internet streaming and I was wondering if this came into play when considering the market size of a sports team.

MSK

[Nigel Tufnel]

You're correct, I don't - which is why I posted some data to develop an understanding.

1) From what I've been raised to understand about profits is that you put in less money and hope the money you bring in is more than your initial investment.

2) I believed that market size meant that you had potential access to a certain amount of consumers with disposable income who would be interested in your product. Hence, Frostburg, MD has a much smaller market size than Brooklyn, NY.

3) The number of Orioles fans within the region who spend money on tickets and other ancillary products should be greater than the operating costs and that leads to a greater profit. Said profit is then spun around on marketing, overhead and payroll flexibility.

4) I don't really get what's going on with MASN. I thought the Nationals had to pay Angelos fees for being on MASN and also had to pay for the right to move into the Balto-Wash market to begin with.

Bottom line for me is understanding the justification for our budgets if the market size suggests more could be spent in the long run.

MSK

Wow, I didn't realize how confused you were. No wonder you always seem so annoyed.

[weams]

I wasn't suggesting this was the truth, Sorry if it came off that way. I do know how ratings work for TV and it goes like this:

1) Live (watching it when it is broadcast)

2) Live+3 (watching it within three days of broadcast)

3) Live+7 (watching it withing seven days of broadcast)

That's what I meant when I said metrics can be skewed. There's a big issue in Hollywood regarding ratings from live vs. DVR vs. internet streaming and I was wondering if this came into play when considering the market size of a sports team.

MSK

The whole thing that makes sports a lucrative media buy is that Live, In Market, Viewing by fans is by far the largest proportion. People like their live, televised, sports. On Really big screens. Not on laptops. They will watch a beer or viagra commercial or two. They call them pee breaks.

They will probably keep their cable or satellite just to get them too!