Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Expansion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Expansion

    Is expansion bad for the game of baseball?
    35
    Yes
    57.14%
    20
    No
    28.57%
    10
    No difference
    14.29%
    5
    2016 World Series Champions

  • #2
    Originally posted by Hammerin Hank
    Is expansion bad for the game of baseball?
    I think its GREAT for baseball. It makes things more balanced gives players more of a choice of where to play, more money is made its also one of the best ways to expand the baseball fanbase
    The 2006 Boston Red Sox are better on paper then both the 2004 world championship team, and the 2005 team.
    Predictions:
    Josh Beckett wins 23 Games
    Mike Lowell has a bounce back season
    Kevin Youkillis will be exposed as a bench player, nothing more.
    Curt Schilling will have his worst season, ever.
    Coco Crisp will create more runs then Damon did in 2005.
    Trot Nixon will be on the DL 3 times.
    Keith Foulke will lose Closers job to Hanson by June.


    And the Boston Red Sox will win 99 games

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by monty
      I think its GREAT for baseball. It makes things more balanced gives players more of a choice of where to play, more money is made its also one of the best ways to expand the baseball fanbase
      Hey monty, welcome to BBF. It's good to have another Sox fan around here.

      May I suggest you change your avatar?

      We're not really about that here as it it really offends some of the more sensitive members.

      You'll be asked to change as soon as Matt sees it anyways. You may as well save yourself the trouble.
      "I think about baseball when I wake up in the morning. I think about it all day and I dream about it at night. The only time I don't think about it is when I'm playing it."
      Carl Yastrzemski

      Comment


      • #4
        i don't understand the question - expansion when?

        1961
        1962
        1969
        1977
        1993
        1998
        future

        i think it has worked so far - not so sure about future expansion at this point - baseball is at a loss how to govern itself - you can't have franchises spending over $200M on talent and others less than $50M - wholly and completely without reason (sound judgment) - the xfer of the expos may be the first in a domino effect - the game needs to figure things out - they were just talking about contraction - shows they are a little clueless and spinning their wheels

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by runningshoes53
          Hey monty, welcome to BBF. It's good to have another Sox fan around here.

          May I suggest you change your avatar?

          We're not really about that here as it it really offends some of the more sensitive members.

          You'll be asked to change as soon as Matt sees it anyways. You may as well save yourself the trouble.
          The av's original picture is the kid in a Feyenoord Rotterdam shirt. Yes Dutch soccer "fan".

          I think expansion would not be good for baseball at the moment.

          We have had a recent expansion with the Diamond Backs and Devil Rays.
          IMO the level of play will go down with every expansion and both leagues have to settle down for a while.

          Furthermore I think that a lot of teams have trouble in surving financially, so I doubt it would be wise to drag two more teams into financial trouble.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Hammerin Hank
            Is expansion bad for the game of baseball?
            Ummm... be more specific... do you mean expansion from the original teams or do you mean adding more expansion teams in the future?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by runningshoes53
              Hey monty, welcome to BBF. It's good to have another Sox fan around here.

              May I suggest you change your avatar?

              We're not really about that here as it it really offends some of the more sensitive members.

              You'll be asked to change as soon as Matt sees it anyways. You may as well save yourself the trouble.
              Alright, i changed it. My apologies..
              The 2006 Boston Red Sox are better on paper then both the 2004 world championship team, and the 2005 team.
              Predictions:
              Josh Beckett wins 23 Games
              Mike Lowell has a bounce back season
              Kevin Youkillis will be exposed as a bench player, nothing more.
              Curt Schilling will have his worst season, ever.
              Coco Crisp will create more runs then Damon did in 2005.
              Trot Nixon will be on the DL 3 times.
              Keith Foulke will lose Closers job to Hanson by June.


              And the Boston Red Sox will win 99 games

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Astro
                Ummm... be more specific... do you mean expansion from the original teams or do you mean adding more expansion teams in the future?
                I mean adding more teams in the future.
                2016 World Series Champions

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by monty
                  I think its GREAT for baseball. It makes things more balanced gives players more of a choice of where to play...
                  I agree. I don't see how expansion by 2 more teams would be bad for MLB.
                  My Top 4 funniest BBF posts ever:

                  1) "plZ dOn;t' pOsT LikE tHIs n e mOr!"

                  2) "The teams play 1962 games in 180 days."

                  3) "Stadiums don't move silly, people do."

                  4) "Once again you quibble, because it is I who speaks."

                  5) Almost anything RuthMayBond says...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Hammerin Hank
                    I mean adding more teams in the future.
                    Expansion for the sake of expansion? No, and I'm wondering how you can expand w/o any specifics.

                    You'd need to do this in pairs, since you'd have to allow every team to play on a given day. Are you talking about like when the D-Rays expanded to Florida, which had only one MLB team, and several minor league teams?

                    I'd have to see where you're talking about. If Las Nevas or Reno, I'd be against, per the gambling there. Where exactly would these teams be placed? Do the local municipalities finance a new $400m+ stadium, or do the private investors, aided by corporate subsidation (such as naming rights) pay for this?

                    I also forgot, when teams expand, where do they get all of the players from? The other teams' farm system? Free agency? They've got nothing to trade for.
                    Please read Baseball Fever Policy and Forum FAQ before posting. 2007-11 CBA
                    Rest very peacefully, John “Buck” O'Neil (1911-2006) & Philip Francis “Scooter” Rizzuto (1917-2007)
                    THE BROOKLYN DODGERS - 1890 thru 1957
                    Montreal Expos 1969 - 2004

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think we have plenty of teams now. We don't need anymore teams that no one cares about.
                      Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        When the teams expand, there's an expansion draft held with a pool of players that each of the other 30 teams don't protect. Each team is allowed to lockup a certain number of players; these players aren't eligable for the expansion draft.

                        They also get high draft picks in the rookie draft I believe.
                        AL East Champions: 1981 1982
                        AL Pennant: 1982
                        NL Central Champions: 2011
                        NL Wild Card: 2008

                        "It was like coming this close to your dreams and then watching them brush past you like a stranger in a crowd. At the time you don't think much of it; you know, we just don't recognize the significant moments of our lives while they're happening. Back then I thought, 'Well, there'll be other days.' I didn't realize that that was the only day." - Moonlight Graham

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thanks, dc00. I must've closed my eyes when Tampa Bay and Arizona got their players.

                          So I figure that the expansion draft is exclusively of minor leaguers, correct? What about the MLB players, such as vets? Are new expansion teams allowed to trade their minor league picks for veterans who can play that season? I presume that they are allowed to do this. Or are they limited exclusively to the FA market?
                          Last edited by Mattingly; 01-24-2006, 03:55 PM.
                          Please read Baseball Fever Policy and Forum FAQ before posting. 2007-11 CBA
                          Rest very peacefully, John “Buck” O'Neil (1911-2006) & Philip Francis “Scooter” Rizzuto (1917-2007)
                          THE BROOKLYN DODGERS - 1890 thru 1957
                          Montreal Expos 1969 - 2004

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            They can take any player not on the protected list. Vets, Rookies, minor leaguers, bench players it's their choice and they can also sign any free agents they want. They also start drafting in the amateur/first year player draft 2 or 3 years before the actual expansion draft so that they do have minor leaguers. There are often trades done right after the draft by the expansion teams and others.

                            Veterans taken in the last 2 expansion drafts include: Chuck McElroy & Brian Boehringer in 1998. Charlie Hayes, Jody Reed, Bryan Harvey, Greg Hibbard, Jack Armstrong, Tom Edens, Alex Cole, Danny Jackson & Kevin Reimer in 1993.

                            Back to the orginal topic I think expansion could be viable in the next 10 years or so. We have to wait and see if Washington is a long term soultion for the Nationals and see what happens with the Marlins. If there are still 2 cities that want and can afford a team I'm sure something will be done to give them a team. Possible cities include Charlotte, Portland, Buffalo, and if a strong ownership group emerges maybe even a possible return to Montreal. Baseball has a strong history of giving second chances (Kansas City, Milwaukee, Seattle & Washington)
                            Lets Go Yankees, Valley Cats, Dutchmen, UT Spartans and ECU Pirates.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Historically, expansion has always been done relative to population; I don't think that baseball should forever remain at 30 teams; as the population grows and both the talent pool and the fan base grows, there will be a demand for more teams. Perhaps even international teams other than Canada (Japan? Mexico? Dominican Republic?) where there is a large, relatively untapped MLB fan base.
                              "Too many pitchers, that's all, there are just too many pitchers Ten or twelve on a team. Don't see how any of them get enough work. Four starting pitchers and one relief man ought to be enough. Pitch 'em every three days and you'd find they'd get control and good, strong arms."

                              -Cy Young

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X