10.07.11
by

News for 10/7/11

If you haven’t seen it yet, you might want to wear shades before viewing the redesigned Miami Marlins logo:

Not enough warning? My bad.

Don’t think that’s crazy enough? Then try on this animatronic sculpture that will go a*****t when a Marlin hits a home run. (Miami New Times/SB Nation)

Did we enter a ballpark or a casino? Or the inside of a pinball machine? (Image from SB Nation)

Bad news for Mariners fans: the team’s general suckitude may continue well into the future, as long as minority owner Chris Larson’s divorce puts a freeze on spending. (Seattle Times)

San Antonio is looking to build a downtown ballpark after all. Too bad it’s only for the college team (UT-San Antonio) and the AA Missions. (SA Business Journal)

Business owners near NBA arenas are frightened about the impact of an extended lockout. (USA Today)

The NBPA rejected an owners’ offer of a 50/50 split of revenue (after expenses). The players wanted 51%. Bad move, players. That was the best offer you’ll get. You could’ve made it up with more guaranteed years or other concessions. (CBS Sports)

After getting slapped down by the Tigers Mets in their request to have their AAA affiliate play in Newark for a year, the junior team will play a barnstorming season in six different cities all of New York state. Nearly half of the schedule (37 games) will be played in Rochester. (NY Times)

Detroit citizens continue the good fight to save what’s left of Tiger Stadium. (ESPN)

Fitch withdrew its BBB- rating of San Jose Redevelopment Agency’s tax allocation bonds series 2006E and 2006F because the bonds weren’t actually sold. Fitch also put a Negative Watch on the NBA’s $1 Billion revolving credit facility, rating it a BBB+ in the process. (Marketwatch/Reuters)

Youth ballfields near the new Yankee Stadium won’t permanently open until 2012, a full three years after the big stadium opened.

September radio ratings are out. Looks like things are stabilizing a bit.

Dan Hennessey is stepping down from doing delay recaps at the Baseballin’ on a Budget blog (ESPN SweetSpot network). He did a pretty good job. If anyone’s interested, apply within.

BREAKING (2:30 PM): Union Pacific has decided to sell 167 acres of land near NUMMI. The land was supposed to be developed as a new railyard. BANG’s Matt Artz also got from the news that the northern parcels, 94 acres in all, would be available for only 12-15 months. The southern 53 acres (near the 880-Mission interchange) apparently would not be subject to such a deadline. San Jose mega-developer Barry Swenson has expressed interest. 

10.06.11
by

A Tale of Two Cities

I am personally very tired of reading hackneyed, reactionary articles that have myopic views of reality. I just read one that takes the cake.

It seems the Bay Area media is all in a tizzy about our Green and Gold Heroes. They don’t want to win, you see. That is the problem! They won’t sign high dollar free agents (not that they didn’t pursue any, but the reason those folks didn’t come is because Lew Wolff doesn’t want to win… not a substandard stadium or more money from the Cardinals and Rangers). They tarped off a “popular” section of the stadium (I thought popular meant a lot of people like them a whole lot and thus they are full on a regular basis) to drive fans away. If only Lew Wolff was as magnanimous as Peter MacGowan, people would be showing up in droves to watch the A’s. And best of all, look at the Tampa Bay Rays, they have built a perennial contender on a small budget. It’s doable if only you want to do it, or so the meme goes.

Upon further examination, that last part of the meme should be “Look how the Rays are replicating what the A’s did earlier in the decade, almost.”

Wait, what? The Rays are everything the A’s aren’t. This is true, currently. The Rays are a small market team that has to compete with the biggest of big spenders every year, and they have managed to make the playoffs 3 of the last 4 seasons. But let’s remember that the Rays are following the A’s playbook.

The Rays, an abject failure of a franchise for their entire existence until 4 years ago, have had the benefit of drafting in the top ten every year from 1999 through 2007. During that time they drafted such notables as Josh Hamilton, Rocco Baldelli, BJ Upton, Delmon Young, Evan Longoria and David Price (and less notables Dawon Brazleton, Jeff Niemann and Wade Townsend).

Prior to the A’s most recent run of success (I like to think it started with playoff contention in 1999 and ended in 2006) the A’s drafted in the top ten 5 out 6 seasons. With those picks they got Ben Grieve, Eric Chavez, Mark Mulder and the good version of Barry Zito (and they passed on Todd Helton to take Ariel Prieto).

In other words, key components of both teams most recent successful seasons came through the draft. Or to paraphrase Billy Beane  in his recent Athletics Nation interview, the core has to come from the farm system. How do you get a stocked farm system? Losing a lot for a decade doesn’t hurt, apparently.

I have a ton of respect for the Tampa Bay Rays. The organization has done an excellent job of drafting and developing, but can we please get real? The Rays have been to the playoffs 3 times in their entire history and were perennial losers for their first decade of existence. This past off season they lost Carl Crawford and Carlos Pena. It isn’t that far off before David Price goes the way of Mark Mulder. The writing is on the wall.

That is not to say that I am expecting, or rooting, for a monumental collapse by the Rays. It is to say that the hardest part is about to hit. The replacing Jason Giambi with Scott Hatteberg part. The taking a flier on Frank Thomas and hoping against hope that he goes bonkers part. The “Do I keep Miggy or Chavvy?” part. Ask us about this stuff Rays fans, we know.

We know that you can only replace an aging DH with another aging DH so many times before Mike Piazza isn’t Frank Thomas. We know sometimes you go Chavvy when you should have gone Miggy. We know that for every Mark Mulder that nets you Daric Barton, Dan Haren and Kiko Calero there is a Tim Hudson that nets you Charles Thomas, Juan Cruz and Dan Meyer. We know that once you stop having top ten draft picks your minor league system only gets you so far and you have to start robbing Peter to pay Paul in one way or another.

That’s the rub. The minor league system is what gives smaller market teams a chance. When it begins to pay off, there are two questions that you can ask to know how wide the window of contention is: 1. How long can you keep these guys together? 2. Are we better off trading them some time before they hit free agency or taking draft picks when they sign with the Yankees?

My guess is that when all is said and done, the Rays won’t match the A’s 8 year (1999-2006) run of contention. But my guess isn’t really that important, the “Do we trade Carl Crawford or take draft picks?” part is in the past and the “Do we trade BJ Upton or take draft picks?” part is just around the corner.

How long until the return of the top ten draft pick part? Only time will tell.

10.05.11
by

Notes from Wolff-Guardino interview 10/4/11

SVLG President Carl Guardino hosted Lew Wolff on KLIV’s The CEO Show (MP3) again, and it wasn’t some fluff piece. For brevity’s sake I didn’t transcribe all of the interview, only a select few quotes. Listen to the rest and decide for yourself.

Guardino asked about the A’s relationship with Cisco Systems, which seemingly hasn’t budged one bit since the Fremont unveiling in 2006.

GUARDINO: Cisco Systems, of course, is San Jose’s largest employer. They’ve been enthusiastic from the start about partnering with you on a ballpark in downtown San Jose. Are they still involved?

WOLFF: Well absolutely. John Chambers always says to me that we’re partners for life. I hope it’s even longer than that. They’ve been standing up with us. We haven’t really imposed on them too much the last couple of years because it’s up to us to deliver, not them.

Guardino went on to ask about the response to the SVLG 75 CEO letter written a year ago. No response from MLB or Commissioner Selig yet. Then Guardino asked how moving to San Jose would shift the future prospects for the ballclub:

Without question the demographics of San Jose per the number of corporations, which you know, the number of sponsorships, and the fact that we’d have a brand new, really creative venue, will probably almost double our revenues. And that’s on the conservative side. And normally baseball is pretty simple. Depending on your revenues, if your salaries are 40% or 50% of your revenues, you can compete. So if our revenues get up to $230-240 million that totally changes our focus in terms of what we can do.

Stop. At no point in any of my previous projections did I ever have the A’s revenue going past $200 million when Cisco Field opens. If Wolff is thinking $230-240 million, the A’s are suddenly in Giants-Angels territory. That’s a huge development. And it’s one Wolff could regret making as fans may hold him to that.

Wolff also talked about the some of the features in the ballpark we’ve talked about here, such as minisuites and personal signage and advertising. Asked about other features of the ballpark, Wolff describes “that thing in right field”:

Because of the size of the site we have – it’s rather compact – we will have a high wall in right field area. Which will have interesting seating which I won’t get into because I can’t describe it properly… We’re not trying to copy either the retro parks like the Giants have, nor are we trying to copy Wrigley Field or Fenway. We’re trying to do what Silicon Valley and all your members of (SVLG) do. Do something that hasn’t been done before, and not worry about where it hits because it doesn’t have an identical twin somewhere.

Wolff makes the case for sharing the Bay Area again. County Assessor Larry Stone (who had called in during a previous interview) asked to clarify Billy Beane’s statement there may be window for MLB to decide after the end of the World Series. Wolff’s response:

No, he’s not misspoken. Part of what Billy said, and I agree with, I may have even prompted Billy to say it, is that we need an answer, frankly now. While you’re not supposed to make announcements in October… we don’t feel bound that baseball will have to wait until after the World Series.

We’ve reached a point now where being in limbo, like we have been for so long, is not fair to Oakland. It’s not fair to San Jose. It’s not fair to our staff of about 130 people. It’s just not fair to anybody. Even a “No” answer, or “You can’t move to San Jose,” we need to know that. We can no longer – if we have any power – dance around this question.

It’s worth listening to the rest of the interview (MP3). They talk about the Giants and their ownership change, the future A’s roster and payroll, and several other topics.

10.04.11
by

San Jose redevelopment set to default after Brown vetoes bill

Bond Buyer reports that a bill written to help the ailing (and largely shuttered) San Jose Redevelopment Agency limp along until its fate was decided by the state Supreme Court in January was vetoed by Governor Brown. Senate Bill X1 8 was designed to extend SJRA’s credit facility past a November 25 deadline. Redevelopment reform bills passed in concurrence with the budget disallowed any new borrowing or even extensions such as the one San Jose (and Rocklin, also in the bill) was asking for.

San Jose wasn’t doing itself any favors by becoming a plaintiff in the League of California Cities/California Redevelopment Agency’s lawsuit against the state and Brown, so no one could expect a favor back from the Governor. San Jose is on the hook for $100 million in redevelopment debt, or rather, JP Morgan is. Buyers of the issued redevelopment bonds are not on the hook according to an earlier Bond Buyer report.

Typically, (Tom Jacobs, Moody’s) said, principal would amortize over three to five years starting a few months after the draw, with interest accruing at an above-market interest rate.

But in this agreement, the San Jose RDA would immediately be obligated to repay the full amount drawn by the trustee — the full $95 million, and the JPMorgan letter says the San Jose RDA will not have the capacity to repay that amount.

It’s unclear what options SJRA will have over the next few weeks, or after the default is triggered. The Diridon ballpark properties have been transferred to San Jose Diridon Development Authority, which should in theory insulate the ballpark project from creditors, but any such speculation is extremely premature at this point. The $100 million at stake is a drop in the bucket compared to SJRA’s $3.5 Billion in total debt. One thing is clear: any new projects San Jose was planning to do in the future will come with extremely high borrowing costs as SJRA’s credit rating (Moody’s: Baa1/Baa2, S&P: BBB+/BBB-) is blown to bits. At this point, SJRA is toast.

10.04.11
by

Wolff on KLIV’s CEO show tonight at 7

Lew Wolff makes the rounds on the radio again, appearing on KLIV-1590 AM’s The CEO Show tonight at 7. He’ll probably talk A’s, Quakes, and Moneyball. I don’t think I’ll be able to listen to it live, but the podcast is usually available shortly after the interview is recorded. The host of The CEO Show is SVLG head Carl Guardino, a notable A’s-to-San Jose supporter and general Valley booster.

10.02.11
by

We (and Sid) get a mention in the Merc

Earlier in the week, I received an email from Merc scribe Scott Herhold requesting to excerpt the now infamous bachelor party account by commenter Sid. I obliged and was grateful for the mention. I had been waiting to find out when the story would hit, so you can imagine my joy at seeing the article this morning.

IA couldn’t get a comment from AT&T. But through Kalra’s chief of staff, Joseph Okpaku, the councilman denied the bulk of Sid’s assertions. The councilman said he didn’t say AT&T was being a “pain.” Through his spokesman, Kalra added that he had never said anything about a backdoor deal. “It seems this guy is trying to get his five minutes of fame by making it seem like he has the inside scoop on the A’s situation,” Okpaku wrote (read the back-and-forth at http://www.mercurynews.com/internal-affairs).

I don’t have much else to write about the whole thing, other than as usual, take everything you hear with several grains of salt.

09.30.11
by

What We Know About Oakland…

Ken Korach is awesome. He is professional. He is erudite. He is classy. As my Quasiuncle Lester always says, “Ken Korach just sounds like summer.” It was nice to start the off season with some good news for us A’s fans, Ken Korach is staying put. It was good news because the move brought some semblance of continuity to a fan ecosphere that has become increasingly chaotic and unstable. It was also good news because Ken Korach is among the best in the business. One of my favorite aspects of the Ken Korach broadcast, just behind “The lights are on but not yet taking effect,” is when, at a critical juncture, he brings total clarity by “resetting” the game. He explains the situation, gives the count, and explains how the game got to whatever critical juncture it had arrived at.

With all the speculation in the media lately, it seems it is time to reset the stadium game a bit. No?

What do we know? I was reading through the comments in a recent thread (one that had devolved into another San Jose v. Oakland steel cage scaffold match) and this question came to me. In particular, “What do we know about Oakland, still the A’s home city of record, and it’s efforts to keep the team?” So, what has Oakland done? The answer is, more than San Jose boosters will admit and less than Oakland boosters believe. There is nuance here.

Let’s start with the stuff we know for certain:

Nine months ago the Oakland City Council authorized up to $750k for an EIR to support the potential development of a MLB stadium just south of Jack London Square (depicted below and outlined in green and red):
Photobucket

Prior to the authorization of the EIR, Oakland met with Bud Selig’s committee and the City was asked to provide potential ballpark sites. They listed four potential sites for the committee. The Coliseum, Howard Terminal and JLS West as well as the Victory Court site depicted above.

Additionally, the City was asked to provide a plan for acquiring the site, relocating businesses and making necessary upgrades to the surrounding infrastructure. Oakland’s plan was to tap RDA funds to carry out this task.

Let’s Go Oakland, without prompting from MLB’s committee, collected $500k from around 30 potential suite owners.

Publicly, that is all we know. MLB asked for some specific things, Oakland delivered (at least a concept in the case of financing site acquisition while RDA works its way through the legal system). Oakland boosters also took an extra step to show there is a premium ticket market in Oakland and the East Bay. These things above have been confirmed by Doug Boxer, co-chair of Let’s Go Oakland.

What else have we heard? Well, we heard Bryan Grunwald’s 980 Ballpark concept had been tabbed as an alternative to be studied in the EIR. We have heard that maybe MLB had floated a potential loan of $150M for a ballpark in Oakland. We heard that Clorox might be interested in naming rights. We know that Jean Quan and Lew Wolff met recently and we heard they talked about the Coliseum and Victory Court.

None of these things are verifiable. Therefore, we don’t know these things.

This leaves us waiting for one thing: the completion of the aforementioned EIR. What’s troubling about this is that when the EIR process was being discussed, it was mentioned by Oakland Boosters that the whole process could be done within a year. As ML outlined at the time, it could have been done in a year, provided the Draft EIR was completed within 3, or so, months. This week we heard rumblings that the EIR hasn’t even begun because of ongoing negotiations between the City and the firm doing the work.

To be clear, we don’t know anything about the EIR at this point. We don’t know when it will be delivered. We don’t know that it has started. The Draft EIR could almost be done.

Just like we don’t know anything about stadium construction financing in Oakland. There could be a neatly sewn up package of naming rights, sponsorship deals, a loan and charter seat sales just waiting for Larry Ellison, of Mark Cuban, to pry the team from Lew Wolff. There could be back room discussions with the local State legislators to work out bonds backed by the income taxes of the Athletics players to help finance construction, as was pitched in Portland when they were trying to get the Expos to come to town.

And this is the challenge with Oakland’s strategy of saying nothing and waiting out Lew Wolff’s time as an owner… It leaves all kinds of room for wild speculation and wrong assumptions. The question for me, which admittedly leads to more speculation, is “Why isn’t Oakland sharing the path they see to a new stadium being built in their fine City?”

I have heard and read many different versions of why they aren’t being open. They don’t want Wolff to know the plan so that he can’t poke holes in it. They are working around Wolff with MLB and MLB wants them to be quiet. The sponsors they have lined up don’t want Wolff to know they support an Oakland plan because they want to have sponsorship opportunities in San Jose should that be the eventual choice.

Here’s another potential reason for the strategy: they are hiding the fact that there are no answers to the tough questions everyone wants to hear answers to.

There could be any number of reasons for the tight lipped approach. Until someone speaks up, we will all be left guessing.

09.29.11
by

Who’s staying where?

If you tend to read things too quickly, especially headlines, you could be forgiven for misinterpreting one or more of the following headlines I gathered for the Google:

See, I read the headline from the Stiglich “…Beane says he expects team to remain in Oakland”. Everything we’re hearing is still so fuzzy and noisy, perhaps all headlines require a double take.

Again, there isn’t any legitimately new news, only a shift in tone that we’re detecting. In Slusser’s piece, Beane walks back the moving talk slightly:

“Over the course of the 2 1/2 years we’ve been told it,” Beane said. “So this time, I’m going to believe it.”

The difference between now and the previous 2 1/2 years is that Beane hasn’t spoken out about the decision much, only to say that the A’s need a new ballpark.

Lest you think the organization only hires company men, there is this quote from Bob Melvin (via the AP piece):

“Lew won’t want to hear this, I kind of like the place,” Melvin said. “I grew up here, I went to concerts, it’s well-documented. I know that it’s outdated and we need a new place.”

Then again, if Melvin is still A’s manager come 2015 in a San Jose ballpark, you can expect him to praise the new venue profusely (without dumping on the Coli too much).

09.29.11
by

The Game is on the rebound

We wondered if rebranding of 95.7 and the hiring of new hosts would help. It sure looks like it has. September ratings are due next week, but it doesn’t hurt to take a peek at how the stations performed in August.

It’ll be interesting to see how the offseason shapes up. Not having the Giants on the air should prove an equalizer, which should provide The Game plenty of opportunity to gain in the ratings. The Game’s football coverage is already tons better than KNBR, with Greg Papa and Eric Davis providing credibility for both local teams and a dedicated college football show on Saturdays. Chris Townsend will have Gio Gonzalez picking football games regularly, which will hopefully lead to a regular A’s hot stove show to keep fan interest going. Slow and steady, it looks like progress.