David Rubenstein 2024

[emmett16]

I watched the Kevin Hart Netflix special last night.  He was receiving the Mark Twain award at the Kennedy Center. Ruby got a little face time in the audience at the beginning of the show.  Sitting right up front.  

[baltfan]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I guarantee you anything he said about extensions would be brought up when player X was traded away or allowed to walk.

Nats fans were fine about Soto and Harper because they knew the club tried. 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Nats fans were fine about Soto and Harper because they knew the club tried. 

And they got a ring.

And extended Stras.

[baltfan]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

And they got a ring.

And extended Stras.

Got the ring after Harper left. 

[Malike]

2 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Nats fans were fine about Soto and Harper because they knew the club tried. 

Soto turning down 400M wasn't on the Gnats. That is a huge sum of money, yeah. They didn't try to lowball him.

[baltfan]

Just now, Malike said:

Soto turning down 400M wasn't on the Gnats. That is a huge sum of money, yeah. They didn't try to lowball him.

Agreed. My point was that the fans knew the Nats were trying.  The Orioles have not tried.  People can say that we don’t know but Gunnar was asked and said there were no talks that he had any knowledge of.  No player should be upset if the Orioles came out and said they wanted some extensions.  And the fans are going to be happy they are at least trying. Right now we have no evidence they have even tried.  This is why many, including some defending saying nothing, were upset with Angelos. 

[Malike]

1 minute ago, baltfan said:

Agreed. My point was that the fans knew the Nats were trying.  The Orioles have not tried.  People can say that we don’t know but Gunnar was asked and said there were no talks that he had any knowledge of.  No player should be upset if the Orioles came out and said they wanted some extensions.  And the fans are going to be happy they are at least trying. Right now we have no evidence they have even tried.  This is why many, including some defending saying nothing, were upset with Angelos. 

Boras has never had a guy sign a long-term extension with 2 years of service time or less. I'm sure it's something they will look long and hard at after the season. I don't expect that to change in May of this year, but I do think that if they make an offer that he turns down, people won't think they lowballed him.

[Bemorewins]

17 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Agreed. My point was that the fans knew the Nats were trying.  The Orioles have not tried.  People can say that we don’t know but Gunnar was asked and said there were no talks that he had any knowledge of.  No player should be upset if the Orioles came out and said they wanted some extensions.  And the fans are going to be happy they are at least trying. Right now we have no evidence they have even tried.  This is why many, including some defending saying nothing, were upset with Angelos. 

If the bolded is true, they are most likely talking to someone (if not Gunnar - Adley). Rubenstein is no idiot (like John Angelos was). He knows that the long term viability from a business standpoint is not in allowing #35 and #2 get away and go elsewhere. For those who have been to games this season, it is clear to see from all of those jerseys around the stadium who the fans have fallen in love with. Extensions are standard operating procedure in MLB currently (even for the lowest budget teams not name Athletics). The Orioles under JA were operating as an outlier. That trend is very unlikely to continue under Rubenstien. He appears to care too much to allow that to happen.

IMO the Orioles must retain at least one of Gunnar or Adley AND others if they want to grow their fanbase in the market. You have to have a face or 2 of the franchise to sell and for people to continue to come see and fall in love with. Long gone are the days when people are simply loyal to institutions. 

[emmett16]

21 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

If the bolded is true, they are most likely talking to someone (if not Gunnar - Adley). Rubenstein is no idiot (like John Angelos was). He knows that the long term viability from a business standpoint is not in allowing #35 and #2 get away and go elsewhere. For those who have been to games this season, it is clear to see from all of those jerseys around the stadium who the fans have fallen in love with. Extensions are standard operating procedure in MLB currently (even for the lowest budget teams not name Athletics). The Orioles under JA were operating as an outlier. That trend is very unlikely to continue under Rubenstien. He appears to care too much to allow that to happen.

IMO the Orioles must retain at least one of Gunnar or Adley AND others if they want to grow their fanbase in the market. You have to have a face or 2 of the franchise to sell and for people to continue to come see and fall in love with. Long gone are the days when people are simply loyal to institutions. 

Fans like winning more than the name on the back of the jersey.  

[Bemorewins]

Just now, emmett16 said:

Fans like winning more than the name on the back of the jersey.  

I know that we have a difference of opinion as it relates to player retention/extensions.

But I think we both can acknowledge that the name on the back of the jersey impacts winning (i.e. star/great players).

I can name different models when extensions/big time FA signing have lead to increased attendance/marketplace relevance/fan engagement.

How many models/examples can you name when a team had constant turnover, didn’t retain superstars/had an ongoing rebuild/reload/whatever you want to call it; and that lead to robust community engagement, high fan attendance/ticket sales, and growing merch sales?

[Orioles West]

5 hours ago, baltfan said:

Notably nothing about seeking extensions.  There is no reason he can’t go on the record re wanting this. 

I’m fine with what DR keeps saying — maybe others will eventually believe him — that he is leaving baseball decisions to his baseball people. And his GM doesn’t like to tip his hand about anything, especially contracts.

I think these guys like winning and seem to like their team. They will make mistakes, but I do have faith they want the O’s to be as good as they can be with the resources they have. Of course I hope they sign some of our young guys and expand the payroll. I just don’t need promises in an interview. 

[emmett16]

11 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

I know that we have a difference of opinion as it relates to player retention/extensions.

But I think we both can acknowledge that the name on the back of the jersey impacts winning (i.e. star/great players).

I can name different models when extensions/big time FA signing have lead to increased attendance/marketplace relevance/fan engagement.

How many models/examples can you name when a team had constant turnover, didn’t retain superstars/had an ongoing rebuild/reload/whatever you want to call it; and that lead to robust community engagement, high fan attendance/ticket sales, and growing merch sales?

First thing that comes to mind is Just about everybody successful college basketball team.  Duke, Kentucky, UConn, etc.  turnover every year, win every year, massive attendance and merch sales.  

[Bemorewins]

5 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

First thing that comes to mind is Just about everybody successful college basketball team.  Duke, Kentucky, UConn, etc.  turnover every year, win every year, massive attendance and merch sales.  

College has a different relationship with fans/students especially alumni who are forever connected to that particular school regardless of the sports team.

I was talking about professional American sports. I can’t think of a single instance where that model produces great revenue, fan engagement, attendance, relevance in the market.

As a matter of fact, people are not institution loyal when it comes to almost any aspect of life anymore - (brands, religion, music, fashion, marriage, etc). Sports are no different IMO.

Furthermore, when it comes to entertainment, politics, religion, etc for the consumer/customer for them it’s all about how it makes them feel. If people start carrying a bunch of “anxiety” because we continue to lose star players or the angst continues to build regarding “will we resign players x and y” it will begin to be reflective in attendance/market place engagement.

Right now the Orioles are a hot brand in the community and it feels good being a fan because everything is going so well. But you start allowing Adleys and Gunnars to walk and that will change. 

[deward]

9 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

First thing that comes to mind is Just about everybody successful college basketball team.  Duke, Kentucky, UConn, etc.  turnover every year, win every year, massive attendance and merch sales.  

Not apples to apples. College sports fans know going in that every player is only there for a limited time. You still knew you were getting the entire collegiate career of those players (before the recent changes in transfer rules, anyway). Your favorite star wasn't getting poached by Duke mid-career (again, before the transfer portal). There's a big difference between that fan experience and knowing that all your best players will be lured away by teams with deeper pockets after a few years. 

[emmett16]

18 minutes ago, deward said:

Not apples to apples. College sports fans know going in that every player is only there for a limited time. You still knew you were getting the entire collegiate career of those players (before the recent changes in transfer rules, anyway). Your favorite star wasn't getting poached by Duke mid-career (again, before the transfer portal). There's a big difference between that fan experience and knowing that all your best players will be lured away by teams with deeper pockets after a few years. 

 

20 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

College has a different relationship with fans/students especially alumni who are forever connected to that particular school regardless of the sports team.

I was talking about professional American sports. I can’t think of a single instance where that model produces great revenue, fan engagement, attendance, relevance in the market.

As a matter of fact, people are not institution loyal when it comes to almost any aspect of life anymore - (brands, religion, music, fashion, marriage, etc). Sports are no different IMO.

Furthermore, when it comes to entertainment, politics, religion, etc for the consumer/customer for them it’s all about how it makes them feel. If people start carrying a bunch of “anxiety” because we continue to lose star players or the angst continues to build regarding “will we resign players x and y” it will begin to be reflective in attendance/market place engagement.

Right now the Orioles are a hot brand in the community and it feels good being a fan because everything is going so well. But you start allowing Adleys and Gunnars to walk and that will change. 

The point is winning, not the players, builds the brand.  If the team wins the brand will grow.  Plain and simple.