A Realistic View at 2021: Part I

[Swiharts Ghost]

Changing gears a bit .A lot of talk about Mitch any support here for Devers at 1b ? I don’t want to give up on him ar 3b but maybe it’s time to move him over ? Don’t get me wrong I think 1b is often overlooked at in difficulty.I guess my idea is to have Mitch mentor Rafy at 1b.Maybe we could then trade chavis ? We have a kid waiting in the wings however for 1b .Do we then trade Rafy or the kid if the season goes sideways for pitching ? I love Rafy but maybe this is a bigger year for him than many understand .My vote is move him over now and go get Mitch ASAP .I would love To see Mitch take Cora’s spot someday . Edited December 16, 2020 by Swiharts Ghost

[mvp 78]

Changing gears a bit .A lot of talk about Mitch any support here for Devers at 1b ? I don’t want to give up on him ar 3b but maybe it’s time to move him over ? Don’t get me wrong I think 1b is often overlooked at in difficulty.I guess my idea is to have Mitch mentor Rafy at 1b.Maybe we could then trade chavis ? We have a kid waiting in the wings however for 1b .Do we then trade Rafy or the kid if the season goes sideways for pitching ? I love Rafy but maybe this is a bigger year for him than many understand .My vote is move him over now and go get Mitch ASAP .I would love To see Mitch take Cora’s spot someday .

 

Devers gets another shot at 3b under Cora. He was decent there in 2019. I think this weird year really messed up his defense. He's athletic enough to be an above average 3b. If he throws the ball all over the place again this year, he gets moved to 1b/LF.

[Bellhorn04]

Devers gets another shot at 3b under Cora. He was decent there in 2019. I think this weird year really messed up his defense. He's athletic enough to be an above average 3b. If he throws the ball all over the place again this year, he gets moved to 1b/LF.

 

Yep, that's all that needs to be said about it.

[Elktonnick]

So it begins. The owners want to delay the start of the 2021 season until all players have been vaccinated. This means probably until May or June. The owners are projecting a 140 game season. Needless to say the players are opposed wanting to play the full 162. I for one think the owners have the high ground. I think it fool hearty to begin the season until most if not all involved have had the opportunity to have been vaccinated. I also think what the government of Canada decides regarding cross border travel will play a big role as to when the season begins. Here is an excerpt from yesterday's Athletic

 

"Because a CBA is in place, MLB has no entrée to unilaterally change the length of season. No proposal on a shortened season has been made and there is no negotiation on that specific point, at least not at this time. The union does not appear opposed to any revision of the schedule, but if a reduction in games played is to include a drop in pay, the players are uninterested. If the games would be made up later in the year or player pay would be the same, there could be greater room for discussion. To this point, MLB has indicated interest only in a scenario that includes reductions for missed games." The Athletic De 15 2020

[Bellhorn04]

So it begins. The owners want to delay the start of the 2021 season until all players have been vaccinated. This means probably until May or June. The owners are projecting a 140 game season. Needless to say the players are opposed wanting to play the full 162. I for one think the owners have the high ground. I think it fool hearty to begin the season until most if not all involved have had the opportunity to have been vaccinated. I also think what the government of Canada decides regarding cross border travel will play a big role as to when the season begins. Here is an excerpt from yesterday's Athletic

 

"Because a CBA is in place, MLB has no entrée to unilaterally change the length of season. No proposal on a shortened season has been made and there is no negotiation on that specific point, at least not at this time. The union does not appear opposed to any revision of the schedule, but if a reduction in games played is to include a drop in pay, the players are uninterested. If the games would be made up later in the year or player pay would be the same, there could be greater room for discussion. To this point, MLB has indicated interest only in a scenario that includes reductions for missed games." The Athletic De 15 2020

 

Riddle me this: how is it in the owners' interest to have a shorter season? It obviously reduces payroll costs, it just as obviously reduces revenue.

[mvp 78]

So it begins. The owners want to delay the start of the 2021 season until all players have been vaccinated. This means probably until May or June. The owners are projecting a 140 game season. Needless to say the players are opposed wanting to play the full 162. I for one think the owners have the high ground. I think it fool hearty to begin the season until most if not all involved have had the opportunity to have been vaccinated. I also think what the government of Canada decides regarding cross border travel will play a big role as to when the season begins. Here is an excerpt from yesterday's Athletic

 

"Because a CBA is in place, MLB has no entrée to unilaterally change the length of season. No proposal on a shortened season has been made and there is no negotiation on that specific point, at least not at this time. The union does not appear opposed to any revision of the schedule, but if a reduction in games played is to include a drop in pay, the players are uninterested. If the games would be made up later in the year or player pay would be the same, there could be greater room for discussion. To this point, MLB has indicated interest only in a scenario that includes reductions for missed games." The Athletic De 15 2020

 

They already forced a season without vaccinations. Doesn't make sense to hold out for them now. It just makes 2020 look like even more of a fool's errand.

[mvp 78]

Riddle me this: how is it in the owners' interest to have a shorter season? It obviously reduces payroll costs, it just as obviously reduces revenue.

 

Expectation is little to no fans until the summer when more paying customers have been vaccinated.

[jacksonianmarch]

Not sure if the owners really care if the players get vaccinated. It makes far more sense for the owners to have the fans vaccinated and get their butts in seats

[mvp 78]

Video of ERod throwing.

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CI3WCX9FvPg/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet

[Bellhorn04]

Expectation is little to no fans until the summer when more paying customers have been vaccinated.

 

Understood. But what about TV revenues?

[mvp 78]

Understood. But what about TV revenues?

 

Owners played down the amount of tv revenues they earned in 2020. They will do so again.

[jacksonianmarch]

Understood. But what about TV revenues?

 

TV revenues clearly didnt support the Phillies and rumor has it the Yanks lost a s*** ton too.

 

I'd pitch a 140 game season ending in late November. You could start the season June 1, play 28 games a month and by Nov 1, start the POs. Might be an issue in the cold weather spots, but these guys can play in the cold. If the players want to get closer to their full checks, they can add DHers back into the fray and maybe squeeze in an extra 10-15 games of pay throughout the 5 month season or end the season 10-15 days sooner to avoid blizzard time in Colorado, NY, Boston, and Minnesota

 

On top of that, if the forecast dips below freezing, I would automatically bump the game from night time to the day

Edited December 16, 2020 by jacksonianmarch

[notin]

TV revenues clearly didnt support the Phillies and rumor has it the Yanks lost a s*** ton too.

 

I'd pitch a 140 game season ending in late November. You could start the season June 1, play 28 games a month and by Nov 1, start the POs. Might be an issue in the cold weather spots, but these guys can play in the cold. If the players want to get closer to their full checks, they can add DHers back into the fray and maybe squeeze in an extra 10-15 games of pay throughout the 5 month season or end the season 10-15 days sooner to avoid blizzard time in Colorado, NY, Boston, and Minnesota

 

Baseball rally needs to take steps to prevent November baseball. It's not even in their best interest to maximize the number ofdays they compete with the more popular NFL.

 

I've been saying it for years but they need to bring back Sunday doubleheaders. The owners are against it because double headers reduce gate revenue (which is not really a factor in pandemic times), but this might be helpful for some struggling teams with what basically turns into a "2 games for the price of one" promotion. And MLB has already taken steps that make this easier on the players by expanding rosters to 26 players...

[jacksonianmarch]

2021 will hopefully be the last year of it's kind. 2022 can roll out the usual way. But every game they play without fans is a massive hit to the bottom line. If the goal is to fatten the wallet after a down 2020, then moving the season back to where fans can be present is their only option

[Bellhorn04]

Baseball rally needs to take steps to prevent November baseball. It's not even in their best interest to maximize the number ofdays they compete with the more popular NFL.

 

I've been saying it for years but they need to bring back Sunday doubleheaders. The owners are against it because double headers reduce gate revenue (which is not really a factor in pandemic times), but this might be helpful for some struggling teams with what basically turns into a "2 games for the price of one" promotion. And MLB has already taken steps that make this easier on the players by expanding rosters to 26 players...

 

Double headers are bullpen killers though, the way pitching staffs are used now.

[jacksonianmarch]

And if the solution is to make the roster 30, adding roster spots increases payroll, which many teams will balk at.

[Elktonnick]

Not sure if the owners really care if the players get vaccinated. It makes far more sense for the owners to have the fans vaccinated and get their butts in seats

 

I think players' vaccinations reduce the expense and logistical issues that arose during last years season. I think it also may be a major issue with allowing seamless cross border travel to Canada.

[Elktonnick]

Riddle me this: how is it in the owners' interest to have a shorter season? It obviously reduces payroll costs, it just as obviously reduces revenue.

 

Your assumption is that fans will return the moment they resume play. It is not a foregone conclusion that states such as California, New York, Pennsylvania Illinois Ohio or Massachusetts will be allowing fans to return before July if then.

[mvp 78]

Double headers are bullpen killers though, the way pitching staffs are used now.

 

Should be 7 inning games for scheduled double headers. That's how they do it in MiLB.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Baseball rally needs to take steps to prevent November baseball. It's not even in their best interest to maximize the number ofdays they compete with the more popular NFL.

 

I've been saying it for years but they need to bring back Sunday doubleheaders. The owners are against it because double headers reduce gate revenue (which is not really a factor in pandemic times), but this might be helpful for some struggling teams with what basically turns into a "2 games for the price of one" promotion. And MLB has already taken steps that make this easier on the players by expanding rosters to 26 players...

 

The long modern game doesn't make twinbills as attractive as they once were to attendees. In 2019, the Red Sox doubleheaders averaged between 6-7 hours in game-time, but I'm not sure how much gap was in between (if they were day-night separate admission). Last year's Bosox played two doubleheaders of 7 innings each in around 5 1/2 hours.

 

The 1975 Red Sox played 13 doubleheaders that averaged around 5 hours total -- that's two games of at least nine innings each; unbelievable as it may seem to modern fans, the Sox swept the Yanks on July 27th of that year in exactly 4 hours, 30 minutes... for two games. A week later, Boston also swept Detroit in 4 hours, 49 minutes, but one game went 10 innings. Each team got to start off the extra frame with a hitter at the plate and a pitcher on the mound...

[notin]

The long modern game doesn't make twinbills as attractive as they once were to attendees. In 2019, the Red Sox doubleheaders averaged between 6-7 hours in game-time, but I'm not sure how much gap was in between (if they were day-night separate admission). Last year's Bosox played two doubleheaders of 7 innings each in around 5 1/2 hours.

 

The 1975 Red Sox played 13 doubleheaders that averaged around 5 hours total -- that's two games of at least nine innings each; unbelievable as it may seem to modern fans, the Sox swept the Yanks on July 27th of that year in exactly 4 hours, 30 minutes... for two games. A week later, Boston also swept Detroit in 4 hours, 49 minutes, but one game went 10 innings. Each team got to start off the extra frame with a hitter at the plate and a pitcher on the mound...

 

And that is now the length of the typical Sox-Yankees game...

[Bellhorn04]

Your assumption is that fans will return the moment they resume play.

 

No, my assumption was that with no games, they lose TV revenues.

[Elktonnick]

No, my assumption was that with no games, they lose TV revenues.

Obviously the.owners know their revenue streams . They know that TV revenue alone does not compensate for the loss of gate to justify playing the extra games without paying customers in attendance. Moreover, I think it is becoming obvious to all professional sports owners that tv ratings of games without fans in attendance are lower then games with fans in attendance.

[moonslav59]

Owners want to make as much money as possible from as many revenue streams as they can have or create.

 

The more TV revenue- the better.

 

Perhaps a few teams are losing money by hosting a game in an empty stadium and not getting enough TV revenue to offset the cost, but my guess is, most teams will make money on each game they televise.

[Elktonnick]

Owners want to make as much money as possible from as many revenue streams as they can have or create.

 

The more TV revenue- the better.

 

Perhaps a few teams are losing money by hosting a game in an empty stadium and not getting enough TV revenue to offset the cost, but my guess is, most teams will make money on each game they televise.

 

That fact that you actually believe that most MLB teams actually make enough money on TV revenue alone without fans in attendance to sustain their operations is incredible. Of course you know this because you are intimately acquainted with the balance sheets and economics of each club.

Edited December 16, 2020 by Elktonnick

[Bellhorn04]

That fact that you actually believe that most MLB teams actually make enough money on TV revenue alone without fans in attendance to sustain their operations is incredible. Of course you know this because you are intimately acquainted with the balance sheets and economics of each club.

 

About 40% of team revenues come from ticket sales, concessions and other gate-related revenues.

 

The math is easy enough to check.

 

Red Sox total 2019 revenue was 519 million

519 million * 40% = 208 million

 

Attendance 2.915 million

Average ticket price about $60

Total revenue from ticket sales = 175 million

Concessions etc. would account for the difference

[Elktonnick]

About 40% of team revenues come from ticket sales, concessions and other gate-related revenues.

 

The math is easy enough to check.

 

Red Sox total 2019 revenue was 519 million

519 million * 40% = 208 million

 

Attendance 2.915 million

Average ticket price about $60

Total revenue from ticket sales = 175 million

Concessions etc. would account for the difference

 

According to Forbes which had the above figures and more. It also shows that Sox had an operating income of 89m in 2019. So it is pretty clear that a loss of 40% of their total revenue which paid attendance represents would turn an approx 90 million operating income into a multi million dollar operating loss.

Btw even Forbes figures are at best an estimate since MLB clubs keep their actual figures quite closely held.

In any case even a cursory understanding of these figures demonstrates that it is simply not sustainable for MLB to operate successfully without paid in game attendance. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.

 

It should also be noted that those figures and ratios of gate to total revenue are for the Red Sox only. Other teams in smaller media markets may be much more dependent on paid attendance.

Edited December 16, 2020 by Elktonnick

[Monster24]

Your assumption is that fans will return the moment they resume play. It is not a foregone conclusion that states such as California, New York, Pennsylvania Illinois Ohio or Massachusetts will be allowing fans to return before July if then.

 

From what I read the vaccine just prevents you from getting symptoms not the actual virus.

So a healthy person could conceivably get the virus not feel a thing and pass it on to others.

If that is correct( I’m not a doctor so I don’t know) may be longer before fans can come back

[Elktonnick]

From what I read the vaccine just prevents you from getting symptoms not the actual virus.

So a healthy person could conceivably get the virus not feel a thing and pass it on to others.

If that is correct( I’m not a doctor so I don’t know) may be longer before fans can come back

I concur. That is why I think the idea of the season beginning on time is unrealistic.

[moonslav59]

That fact that you actually believe that most MLB teams actually make enough money on TV revenue alone without fans in attendance to sustain their operations is incredible. Of course you know this because you are intimately acquainted with the balance sheets and economics of each club.

 

Reading comprehension was never your strong suit.