Filter posts by...
MLB_Management
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Incredible, but because Mattingly did not attest to the correct final score, MLB reversed the game and awarded the win to the Diamondbacks. This happened even though everyone in the stadium was able to see the score.
Oh, sorry, I meant that this happened in a state tournament in golf. Because everyone’s been conditioned to know this rule, been taught this rule, having absorbed this rule, everyone accepts this rule. In fact, I believe this rule was the impetus for George Orwell writing 1984. It’s true. Look it up.
Anyway, the MLB rules committee has proposed this rule, and it’s starting at Little League, so that everyone can be taught the rule, absorb the rule, and accept the rule. Once the conditioning is set, then that’s it, there’s no controversy. All of the hockey fans that will mock the baseball fan for having this rule will face the scorn of the baseball fan because the hockey fan doesn’t understand baseball.
It’s bound to happen. It’ll start with the NHL, then the NBA, the NFL, and finally MLB. But, it might not hit all the MLB teams right away. The Yankees for example won’t corporate-name their stadium. That’s because the Yankees IS a corporate-name.
Eventually, teams will realize that just like they can sell their stadium names (and get a money stream unavailable to the Yankees), they will do the same with jersey rights. I think the Pirates and Marlins and A’s would dearly love to sell rights on their jerseys. Eventually, the other teams will follow. But, the Yankees? It’s possible they won’t.
And, how would it work? Will it be a team-by-team negotiation, or will all teams split the money equally (but only if they participate)? Or, will MLB actually force the Yankees to participate, thereby depleting (to a small extent) their corporate-value name of Yankees?
***
Grantland has an article about the Goldman Sachs Yankees. I haven’t seen it, because their RSS feed is blocked at the office, except for the headline. Feel free to post clips of that article below.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
NOTE: Thread originally posted Nov 17, 2008, but it’s always relevant.
I get asked every now and then “if you know some guy...” who wants to work for some major league team (baseball or otherwise). I figure I should create a rolodex, so that when the time comes, I can be a good matchmaker. So, send me an email (tom~tangotiger~net), type at least the word Rolodex in the subject line, and with numbered answers, to the following questions:
1. your preferred sport(s)
2. where you live
3. where you’d consider relocation (or answer “no")
4. general skillset
Friday, May 11, 2012
Craig points out that Cashman sides on Clemens’ character over McNamee.
In Montreal, Tim Wallach was a frequent golfer, as was his playing partner and best buddy Terry Francona. Didn’t Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz play golf all the time?
Well, Big Brother is not putting it up with it any longer. I wonder if Josh Beckett playing Wii Golf is going to be a question of his team commitment, too.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
I don’t like anything about the balk rule, and now I have another reason.
And please, before someone says “but, you need it because...”, just play devil’s advocate, pretend MLB has paid you 500$ to come up with a solution, and propose your best one. Give me your best effort.
Wednesday, May 09, 2012
This is an opportunity to work with friends-of-The-Book-Blog, Mike, Jeff, Sig, and the rest of the gang there. Tell ‘em you heard it from Tango, and it won’t hurt.
Monday, May 07, 2012
Wait… what? Hamels hit Harper because… what? If Harper is too close, you give him a brushback. Pedro used to revel in brushing hitters back. So, going directly after him was bad enough.
But, Hamels admitting to intentionally hitting Harper? He did that because… what? Because that’s what a pitcher is supposed to do to… what? A great young hitter?
I though Cole Hamels was a really smart guy who is often misunderstood.
Now, Zimm intentionally throws at Hamels (we presume). Zimm won’t admit it, because the unwritten rule is you hit the guy without admitting to it. It’s a question of liability with the commissioner. As long as everyone pretends it could have been an accident, then everyone looks the other way.
Hamels however is like the magician who told everyone how the magic trick worked. Selig will either have no choice but to suspend him, or somehow suggest that the punishment was taken care of on the field (Harper scored the run, and Hamels got plunked).
Hamels makes about 100,000$ per team game. Look for a half-million dollars in lost pay. Hamels seems more Tim Robbins than Kevin Costner in this episode, and Harper is the one who ends up looking like Crash Davis.
Wednesday, May 02, 2012
In this corner, are quotes from the non-lawyers who are not Craig:
And this is Craig:
Wow.
Glove-slap: Dave.
I know plenty of you kids want to get into MLB, and one of the really good ways is by interning. Tell ‘em you heard it from Tango, as it’ll help.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
As told to Murray Chass.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
I’m shocked the MLBPA had allowed these deals for as long as they did. Gretzky signed his personal services contract in the WHA in the late 1970s. A few years after he got to the NHL, the owner-friendly union (Eagleson, later incarcerated) made them change the deal so that there would be no personal-services provision. That somehow a Miller-Fehr led-union would be asleep at the switch here is rather shocking, and it’s great that Weiner stepped in finally. I think there’s something more to this.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Good interview from Crawfish with Mike, who was considerate in highlighting BPro and THT among others.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
For those who haven’t followed the arena issue in NJ, this article does a great job of getting to all the details, including the timeline sidebar.
Are there alot of these disputes around the country?
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Some great opportunity from the looks of the description. I’m sure dozens of the readers here would qualify. Part-time, remote, and baseball? Sounds like an ideal job for someone looking to bolster his/her resume.
And tell ‘em you “heard it from Tango”. It’ll help.
A fun read of the prodigal dad.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Murray Chass has some insight into the Dodgers, and Padres, with a special highlight on Stan Kasten, as well as the goings-on with Moores and Moorad.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Great stuff from Maury.
It’s all well and fine to give valuations for teams (and players). After all, you pluck a number out of the air, you smell it, it’s fine, and you write it down. No fuss, no muss… and no accountability.
Well, for players there IS accountability. We can forecast what the players will sign for, like the Fangraphs community has done, and we can compare to what they actually did sign for. If they can come close, we know the community is in tune with the marketplace. And for the most part, they were.
But what about when Forbes does team valuations? Well, Maury said:
Maybe the best way to look at the Forbes’ valuations is relationship to actual sales. Below is a breakdown of recent club sales and the valuation Forbes had for the club in the year prior to the sale
It’s not a great match, but in terms of getting a quick valuation out of it, it certainly seems at least reasonable. And since it’s the only thing we’ve got, it’s worth using.
from Amazon
Recent comments
Older comments
Page 320 of 342 pages « First < 318 319 320 321 322 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date