Dec 27, 2011, 8:50 AM EST
Via BTF, we find a very cool set of charts over at the Wages of Wins Journal* showing which metropolitan areas in the U.S., based on local income and size, could support expansion franchises or relocated franchises for the major sports.
The upshot for baseball: there really is no place for a team to move that isn’t already part of another team’s existing territory. The largest cities have gotten larger and richer and they are the most viable options for new or relocated franchises. New York could handle at least one more. Two if you count Stamford/Bridgeport/Norwalk, Connecticut. Chicago could handle one. The Inland Empire of California. Any of the other usual suspects such as Las Vegas are “marginal” at best.
Maybe it’s academic. It appears that the Athletics are going to get their stuff figured out soon. That leaves only the Rays as a problem. At least for now.
* Yes, I realize the post is from October. I never saw it before, though, and that’s one of the reasons why I go to Baseball Think Factory every day. They always find this kind of stuff.
- Merry Christmas from HBT! 30
- THE YEAR IN REVIEW: HBT’s most commented-upon stories of the year 83
- The Yankees are treating Alex Rodriguez differently than they treated Derek Jeter. So what? 36
- Braves sign setup man Jason Grilli to two-year contract 13
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot 119
- Phil Hughes signs a three-year extension with the Twins 27
- The Padres have talked to the Phillies about Cole Hamels 23
- Why is John Smoltz a shoo-in for the Hall of Fame? 63
- Bud Selig will get a $6 million a year pension. Which is obscene. (145)
- My Imaginary Hall of Fame Ballot (119)
- Today’s specious anti-Mike Piazza-for-the-Hall-Fame argument (94)
- St. Petersburg City Council votes down deal to allow Rays to look for new stadium site (90)
- Phillies GM told Ryan Howard they’d be better off “not with him but without him” (85)