iortiz

That's the funny thing

this is exactly how confusion starts...

Yes, bravo! A700's perspective is accurate. We are making progress though. You, A700 and me are agreeing that they are not a Big Market team. No way. On the other hand, If you want to split the market saying that KC/Pitt/SD are small market teams and NY and BOS are Big market teams and the rest mid-market team, fine, we can agree on that and move on but I have to tell you that they are still closer to the small market teams than the big market teams. A700 already put another perspective which is fair to me. You are battling in the dark side of the moon with me and A700. I wonder, are you going to battle in the other side of the moon with those who still saying that the Washington Nationals are a big market team? or this is just against A700 and me? BTW check out how the discussion started. I said that the Nats are small market team. Then MVP said that DC is a big market place (Those concepts are different). The rest is history.

Bravo, Maestro. As always you put my ideas in better words and perspective.

Let me play devil's advocate. Will top three stay healthy 190 IP+? Will they post atleast their career numbers?. Are Bard/Aceves the solution? If you give me 3 yes, this team is a WS caliber.

According with bleacher report TB has the best rotation in the majors. TB, NYY, TEX, and LAA are above us in this department. We need a SP so badly. 1. TB 2. Philli 3. SF Giants 4. LAA 5. Braves 6. NYY 7. Texas 8. STL 9. Nats 10. Bos. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...ations/page/22

Well, I already rest my case. If you think that the Washington Nationals are a big market team, you are seriously confused. And again, if you can't realize the importance and impact from a world wide/global approach (beyond the business including baseball), sorry but your business acumen is poor. As simple as that.

Twisting the things, as usual. I should take Meh's advise. You take things out of context.

I'm going to give you a clue. Lets use this thermomether. How many times are the Nats' games transmitted in national TV? You are getting heat, your heat doesn't allow you read properly. I never disputed if DC was a small/big market place. I've said that dozen of times. We are disputing whether the Nats is a big market team or not. That is totally different. I already put several examples of other proffesional sport teams which play in big market places (Clippers, Atletico de Madrid) and are not big market teams. if you can't see that, I really do not know how to make it clearer to you. Now, you are discrediting my source because you do not have arguments. Bring another definition and source of big/small market team and probably we can enrich the discussion.

This is not a language barrier/issue at all. Discuss with UN? And MVP. They are who are saying that the Nats are a big market team, not me. Or what? Don't you like debate with them?

Nope. It is from wiki, actually. You are not reading. Clearly, The post starts saying , according with wiki.... Again, you are rating the size of a market place/territory. We are talking about the size of a market team. As the definition says, it is related with media market coverage. Hence I asked what is the Nats' media market coverage in the US? Do you realize that fanbase/popularity is related with media market? Nats' popularity, even in their own town is questionable. Read the article that I already posted. Nats games are not attractive. Buying advertising in Nats' games is not attractive and/or cheap compared with Big Market teams. Again, Nats are not a big market team.

say that to UN?, no me. They said that the Nats are a big market team. I said that they are not. If they were a big market team they should be similar to NY or slightly above/below them, shouldn't they? Read the thread. I didn't started the polemic. I'm right. The Nats are not a big market team.

Means everything in order to rate the size of a market team. I already posted the definition. Read it.

180 country market coverage is irrelevant? Ok. You do not like the global thing? Ok. Let's limit the territory coverage in the US. What is the Nat's market media coverage in the US?

One question. What is the Nats' media market coverage in US? What is the NY/Bos media market coverage in the US? Now... Make the same excerise World Wide? If you can't see that, sorry but I do not know what else to say.

The global market is everything for any business and mostly in global TELCO companies, if you can't see that, your business acumen is poor . Nats' global coverage is 0. You insist in focus the discussion in DC, which media market percentage is very small in the US and few less in a global perspective.

1. There's no big deal to me. The confusion started when I said that I was not surprised that a small market team like the Nats signed Jackson (since I already have said that), then MVP said that DC is not a small market place. A big market place/territory and a big market team are different concepts. You can split your market place/territory (local (DC)/country (US)/globe). Your roll is totally different in every business aspect in those territories (local (DC)/country (US)/globe). A big market team plays in all those scenarios (local (DC)/country (US)/globe) and its business impacts are very significant in every aspect/level. They are often related at least in a country level penetration. Clearly, Nats do not have that kind of penetration. No even in their own home town. Hence they are not a big market team. It is Conclusive. 2. As I said, big/global market teams are a handful in professional sports around the world beyond the sport. Yankees, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Lakers, Cowboys, among others are big market teams. They play in the global market as well. Those teams (Yankees, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Lakers, Cowboys) are in that category (Big market teams). Clearly, the Nats are not in that category. You say that Forbes rate them in the #16? Is that the rank of a big market team?, I don't think so. 3. The size of a market team is correlated with the media market. I already posted the definition. Nats' media market in the US/world wide is small. DC market is not even ranked in the top 5 in the US, but it is still interesting market to explore. On the other hand, What is the DC's media market percentage in the US? World Wide? Insignificant. Make the maths. NY and Bos are world-wide/big market teams since they cover big media markets and large market places/territories (local/country (US)/globe). Trying to pretend that the Nats are in the same level is just insane. 4. MLB is a globalized league. Sportive/business-concerns/strategy/factors play an important roll outside the US. NY, Boston, Philli, among a few others are frequently transmitted on ESPN and Fox Sports in their Latin American networks since they are big market teams. They have a huge fan base in other countries. Nats are not in that position since they are not a big market team. They are rarely transmitted on National TV (US) and far less world wide. One of the few teams that didn't have a Spanish web site version was the Boston Red Sox. Last year, they released their Spanish version. Why did they do that? They want to attend other markets with more strength like NY. Adrian's contract was a key driver, you bet. 180 M payroll teams can not live only with the gate or their local market. They need to expand their horizons. This is a very good way to do it. Expanding to other countries; selling merchandise/Tv rights/ more tickets/ advertising/ etc. In some countries like Venezuela, Dominicana, Nicaragua, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Panama, etc. baseball is the # 1 sport. In other countries like Japon, Canada, Italy, Mexico, Colombia, Netherlands, etc. this sport has a huge fan base. Maybe you do not realize the important of other markets since you live in the US. When you merge all those markets the business/financial impact is significant. Hell, they reach 180 countries. 4. About Jackson, I already emitted my opinion. Worthless discusion at this point since he is not longer a option. BL. The Washington Nationals are not a big market team. That's my point.

So? A Big market place is one thing. A Big market team is a completely different thing. Still you can split the market place (Local/Country/Globe). What percent represent the DC market in the US? world wide? My point is: The Washington Nationals are not a big market team in the US nor worldwide. No even close.

Nobody is disputing that E1, trust me. I said that the Washington Nationals are not a big market team in the US nor worldwide. According with wiki "In the terminology of professional sports in North America, teams are often said to be based not in a city but in a media market. The size of the media market is usually a good indication of the potential viability of a major league team". Look at the definition I already posted. You can split the market media tough; Local (DC) Country (US), World wide (Global). Nats' local market media is arguably big (according with the article that I already posted nobody follows the Nats, even in their home town). Nats' market media in the US is small (e.i. They rarely appear in National TV). World wide? They are nothing. In other words, buy advertising in Nats games is not attractive and/or very cheap, since nobody follows them (US/Worldwide). In big market teams like NY or BOS the things are completely the opposite. Hence they are not a big market team. Not even close.

I used the global term in order to give it a larger perspective. World wide media market. Whats the problem with that?

Agree, so? Probably in NY and arguably in US. Its not my definition. It is the definition. Read it. I already posted it

Yes DC is a big market place in the US (8?.. not even in the top 3? but interesting). They play in the same market but they definitely do not have the same fan-base in their own hometown/US or around the world. Hence, their media market is abysmal local/US/Around the world. Also, DC is nothing if you take a global perspective. Only a handful are big/global market teams in professional sports around the world. (Real Madrid, Barcelona, Dallas Cowboys, Yankees, Manchester Utd. Lakers, etc.). The Nats are not in that category, not even close. The population/density that these teams cover is worldwide (worldwide media market). The Natas are not in that category, not even close. The Nats are not a big market team. First, They have to win loyalty in their own hometown. In order to do that, they have to win championships since they are young franchise. It is going to take time. Let me put this in perspective. Soccer. El Atletico de Madrid plays in the most important spain market (Madrid), they have a lot of money but they are not a global/big market team, not even close. On the other hand, look at El Real Madrid, they are definitely a global/big market team. Between them, theres an abysm. They are not in the same category. The same applies for Nats/Skins. Football. Steelers do not play in a big market city like DC but they are a global market team. They have a huge fan-base world wide (hence world wide media market). Basket. Clippers play in the same city/stadium where Lakers play and they are not even close to be a global market team. Base. Marlins already spent a lot of money. Nobody follow them in FLorida. They are trying to gain loyalty, first, in their hometown. Going to take time. ETc... BTW I asked for the definition of a market team, no big market city. Still no source.

Share yours and source, and probably we can enrich the discussion. Again, No body follows them. My skins? Even in Mexico they have huge fan base. Please do not compare my skins with the f***ing Nats.