Jump to content

The uniqueness of the Orioles Franchise


wildcard

Recommended Posts

The O's are truly unique among Major League Baseball franchises.    It is the only medium to small scale team in terms of attendance that has  a Regional Sports Network of its size. MASN is the 4th largest RSN in baseball.   Meanwhile, the team without MASN is about 20th among the 30 major league teams in terms of value.  All three RSN that are larger are in NewYork, and Boston.

This graphic show the O's uniqueness  better than I could ever say it.  Tony posted it on the MLB Board but I think its deserves some discussion here.

Its has been the Angelos work of starting, developing and defending MASN that has made it possible for the O's to continually raise payroll.  It no doubt has improved the competitiveness of the Orioles.

It makes me wonder if the the O's as the 7th most valuable franchise (including MASN) has the financial might to keep Manny an Oriole long term.   Its an evaluation of what he means to the franchise.  How much is he worth to the MASN viewers.   Without MASN there is little question that the O's would not have the wealth to keep Manny.  But looking at this chart I wonder.   Can the O's make an offer that makes sense to both Manny and his agent while being a good deal for the Orioles franchise?

What do you think?

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The chart is three years old, so you have to wonder what changes there have been since then.    Also, John Angelos said in a recent interview that you really have to look at the Orioles and MASN as two separate businesses, and sport owners have found that subsidizing their sports franchise with profits from other businesses doesn't work in the long term.    I'm in favor of making Manny a competitive offer, for the simple reason that his likely value actually exceeds even the crazy amount we'd have to pay him, unlike Davis.    But I don't know how far the Orioles will be willing to go, or how much of a discount Manny will be willing to give.   It's anyone's guess, but the odds are not getting better over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Angelos has done some really good things.  Probably the only black mark was the Syd Thrift era, and not just because of Thrift.  

When the team has proven it's good, he's been willing to spend money.    That was true in the '90's and it's true now.    Whether he's spent wisely is another question.    There were years where he was tight-fisted, I think because he didn't think spending more money would make the Orioles a good team at the time.    I can't fault him for that logic.    I do think his style of negotiating hurt the team at times.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grimed1 said:

Having the Nationals here has probably helped out the Orioles and MASN much more then not having them here. The Orioles were having financial issues for some time.

MASN would have existed with or without the Nationals.     It's certainly more valuable with the rights to two major league teams than it would have been with only one.     Just how valuable depends on how the rights fees cases come out in the end.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Angelos has done some really good things.  Probably the only black mark was the Syd Thrift era, and not just because of Thrift.  

Angelos started out terrible, his handling of Davey and Mussina was classic fails.

But, the man learned and grew from that, since to Andy M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, grimed1 said:

Having the Nationals here has probably helped out the Orioles and MASN much more then not having them here. The Orioles were having financial issues for some time.

True. Baltimore is a very difficult market. And was when the Orioles were great as well. The New Camden Yards Era was the only good one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

MASN would have existed with or without the Nationals.     It's certainly more valuable with the rights to two major league teams than it would have been with only one.     Just how valuable depends on how the rights fees cases come out in the end.  

No other baseball team has tv rights to  two franchises.One of which is the  ninth largest television market.Baltimore is not even close to the DC market. 26th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, grimed1 said:

No other baseball team has tv rights to  two franchises.One of which is the  ninth largest television market.Baltimore is not even close to the DC market. 26th.

But before the Nats moved here, the Orioles had the exclusive TV broadcast rights all the way down to North Carolina.    They weren't limited to the Baltimore market.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, grimed1 said:

No other baseball team has tv rights to  two franchises.One of which is the  ninth largest television market.Baltimore is not even close to the DC market. 26th.

MASN has the rights, not the Baltimore Orioles. There's a big difference. The MASN deal was sold to fans as financial security for the team, but it's really financial security for the current and future owner of the Orioles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, wildcard said:

Its has been the Angelos work of starting, developing and defending MASN that has made it possible for the O's to continually raise payroll.  It no doubt has improved the competitiveness of the Orioles

What do you think?

I think you are totally wrong. Since 2001 the Orioles have spent almost exactly the median amount on player salaries (with a few blips down and maybe one blip up). If you look at salary investment by team it looks like the Orioles' strategy is to stay right around the middle. Their investment in players is in line with attendance, market size, etc.  There is no evidence that MASN has been a cash cow for team payroll. If anything, there's some evidence that Angelos has not used the money the way the deal was sold to the public. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Posts

    • Sure, totally agree with you there. But they were definitely contributors to the thinktank there, and they assuredly have taken a lot from Luhnow and the rest of the gang there.  And we now have over half a decade of data from Baltimore. If we were back in the year 2020, I would say “not enough information, we don’t know yet what they’ll do or how they’ll operate separate from the rest of that group.” But it’s been a while now, and I just haven’t seen anything that leads me to believe they’ll trade one or more players that they have drafted and developed into an elite prospect. Have you? I’m not asking to be a jerk, I’m honestly curious if you’ve seen anything different that leads you to believe that is something they’d do.  If they have a major flaw as a group, I think it’s that they’re more than a little rigid. This last draft really hammered home the point that they know what they think is the best approach and they’re not going to diverge from that path, regardless of the circumstances (or the momentary needs of the organization). I think this makes them frustrating at times, but also very easy to predict.  The common thread in every major buy-side trade they’ve been a part of in 17 years is buying low on proven assets. The Cardinals grabbed Holliday in that weird period where the A’s had gotten him but ended up not wanting to keep him. The Astros picked up Carlos Gomez in the middle of an injury-plagued year where he’d taken a step back from his previous all-star status. They snagged Verlander at the August deadline when his fastball was down and his ERA was up. They stole Cole when he was coming off a down year and approaching FA. And the O’s nabbed Burnes in a similar posture. Skubal is the opposite of all those guys. He’s not quite as proven (or durable) as their typical trade target, and he’s at the absolute highest point of his value right now. I just don’t see them talking themselves into “buying high” on a guy, especially when the cost is so astronomical. If I was trying to make an educated guess about who fits their usual mold, someone like Sandy Alcantara in the offseason would make perfect sense. But right now…maybe Luis Castillo? His numbers are down across the board, he’s sliding down the rotation in Seattle (from ace to maybe #4 now?), but he’s also a proven commodity who is a pretty sure bet to give you almost 200 innings every year. Could they work a deal involving some MLB offensive pieces (in addition to prospect value of course) to pry Castillo loose? That would be a pretty Elias/Sig move.
    • I don’t get that at all. The fit makes no sense
    • There was an article recently that connected the Phillies to Mullins but I don't think it speculated on the return or if anyone else would be included.
    • You don't stop at picking up 2024 Kimbrel if you are all in. The Burnes move was great but he traded surplus for an expiring contract.  That's not an all in move.  That's more of a call than an all in.
    • You don't trade Ortiz & Hall for 1 year of Burnes if you're not all in.  I would be surprised if Elias didn't take a legit stab at this.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...