Nov 13, 2012, 3:03 PM EST
About once I year I link to a story about some plan in a non-MLB town to lure a baseball team. The plan is almost always a pipe dream and there’s always a fatal flaw. Then, in the comments, someone says that it’s a no-brainer to move a team to Las Vegas. Then I write a post explaining why I think Las Vegas is a horrible idea for a major league team. Then we go round and round.
Maury Brown has a post up at Baseball Prospectus today that should save us all some time. In it he ranks the top potential destinations for a relocating major league team, listing the stats, the pros and the cons. It’s a pretty comprehensive list of candidates.
And guess what: Las Vegas isn’t at the top. Guess what else: the only truly workable one — as I’ve noted before — is the New York metro area, and that’s not really workable given MLB’s anti-competitive territory system. So it really doesn’t look like there are any great landing spots.
But at least with Maury’s piece we now have a good one-stop resource for our arguing purposes.
- Ian Kinsler hopes Rangers go 0-162, calls GM a “sleazeball” (132)
- The Cleveland Plain Dealer comes out strongly against Chief Wahoo (116)
- Albert Pujols was insulted when someone asked him if he can put up Mike Trout numbers (100)
- Report: Harold Reynolds, Tom Verducci to join Joe Buck for World Series booth at Fox (73)
- The politics of “The Cardinal Way” (67)