You've Gotta Rate: Why the Splashy Move and the Daring Rule Change Are the Way of the Future

[Matthew Trueblood]

Though the entity formerly known as Bally Sports Net lives on, the regional sports network as we once knew it is dead. Baseball has departed the formerly safe, rapidly disappearing cocoon of cable, with its vague ratings demands. Being high-octane entertainment is no longer optional. 

Image courtesy of © Orlando Ramirez-Imagn Images

Don't get it twisted: It has always been important to make good TV, in order to make money in TV. Beginning around the year 2000, when MLB settled in as a cable product and teams started making deals to sell their broadcast rights to various partners for production and distribution, it did matter how good they were, and how much fans wanted to watch them. The more urgent and widespread that demand was, the more teams could charge for their rights—because their partners knew they would have more willing, even clamorous buyers when they turned around to sell the product to cable and satellite providers.

For a while, though, that need was somewhat ill-defined, and it could be inelastic over a period of several years. If a team struck a 10-year rights deal, they could afford to be pretty bad for about the first half of that deal, without seeing it materially affect the fees they could command the next time that deal came up for renewal. That was because, while flagging ratings might destabilize some of the relationships between RSNs and cable or satellite providers, both the networks and the carriers needed inventory, as much as they needed hits. Cable companies knew well that their customers retained their services partially for access to live sports, but also for constant access to something—as opposed to access to any particular thing. When cable was a fairly affordable product and people paid for it fairly blithely, the idea was just to keep them vaguely satisfied with the options they found whenever they pulled up the guide on their screens.

Of course, we know what happened, over time. Cable's need for inventory and the increasing appetite for high-caliber programming led to more expensive shows being produced there, and the networks producing those shows then started fighting for higher carriage fees. So did live sports networks, and after a few years of having those cost increases passed on to them in monolithic blocks, customers began to balk. Not wanting to lose clients, the carriers turned around and passed the complaints they were getting right back to the entities who (they felt) had caused them in the first place: networks, including and especially RSNs.

Ever since that happened, there has been a steady and inexorable climb in the need to rate well to make money airing sports on TV. While even some big-market teams have had nasty carriage disputes, note that neither the Yankees nor the Dodgers have ever come off the air in large swaths of their markets. The Red Sox don't have this problem, either. Although the corporate greed and incompetence of Diamond Sports Group and distribution partner Sinclair Media are not to be overlooked or forgotten, they're not the main reason why RSNs ran into trouble. That writing has been on the wall since before they entered the picture.

If you're not relentlessly entertaining—which, in sports, usually just means winning, but more on that in a bit—then people will not relentlessly pay for your entertainment product. Ever since carriers started demanding lower carriage fees or bumping RSNs to premium tiers and a la carte sections of their offerings, the year-to-year sensitivity of medium-term profitability from TV has skyrocketed. Now, with teams (including the Twins) abandoning the cable model almost altogether and selling Twins.TV directly to consumers, that elasticity has gone through the roof like Willy Wonka in that glass elevator.

How much money can you make broadcasting your team's games? Exactly as much as you earn by being a lot of fun to watch. This is not a problem unique to the Twins, and to their credit, the entire sport has realized it, too. It's an insatiable need to rate that helped bring about the shift ban and the pitch timer in 2023. It's also why, for some teams, there are considerations percolating that go beyond simply winning and losing.

Because, yes, it is possible to win in boring ways—and even to lose in interesting ones. That doesn't mean that any front office is out to play really exciting, really bad baseball. The most enduring and reliable way to draw eyes and sell subscriptions is to win. It's just that we're likely to keep seeing teams chase the splash, a bit. When Dan Hayes of The Athletic writes that the Twins are considering a trade for Dylan Cease, despite the reasons why it might seem far-fetched or even nonsensical, keep this in mind: We now live in an era where you have to rate.

Few teams have properly adjusted to this, so far. In the next half-decade, that will change. There will probably be more rules changes, although they might be minor ones, compared to those that went into effect in 2023. There will probably be playoff and league expansion, not to create more inventory for national postseason broadcast partners (that was the old reason), but to give each team's fan base longer to believe that they might be in contention. There will probably be less tanking, not because owners or front offices are getting any less cynical, but because it's a pretty bad idea in a world where your broadcast revenue fluctuates right along with your ticket sales—and that's the world toward which we're hurtling.

There will also be fewer quiet offseasons and trade deadlines, though that change might take longer. Generally speaking, billionaires keep "spend money to make money" far down their list of go-to expressions. They have plenty of money, thank you, and would like it to make them more money without their having to spend anything, really. Still, in the long run, we'll see teams contemplate bigger moves, and become much less likely to go long stretches without making any. Fans are alive all 12 months of the year, and they're always making decisions about whether to keep subscribing to their team's streaming service.

Teams will eventually have to grasp that moves like the two Carlos Correa signings and the Pablo López trade (yes, even that one, which surely angered as many fans as it thrilled when it first happened) have value that extends beyond the games they help the team win. Those wins definitely matter, but so does getting to wins in exciting, interesting ways. The future is, blessedly, a bit more elastic, and that should make baseball teams have a little more fun.

View full article

[dxpavelka]

took a long time to read and get nothing

 

[tony&rodney]

33 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

took a long time to read and get nothing

 

Dude. When it comes to baseball at this moment .... the times they are a changing.

[Rod Carews Birthday]

I guess, but I think the article was just arguing that making a splashy move was as important as making the right move.  I disagree with that.  Making moves to make moves is just churn, which usually doesn't result in anything gained -- it's style over substance.  Having spent 35 years teaching an elective area to H.S. students, I learned long ago that a program of high quality and deep substance will outdraw and out achieve one based on rah rah and style. 

Indeed, times may be changing but quality never goes out of style.

[Fatbat]

A good history lesson and the twins would be wise to change with the times and not just follow the crowd. Selling out last year for short term $$$ was a disaster. Hopefully the new ownership isn't so short sighted! 

[tony&rodney]

16 minutes ago, Rod Carews Birthday said:

I guess, but I think the article was just arguing that making a splashy move was as important as making the right move.  I disagree with that.  Making moves to make moves is just churn, which usually doesn't result in anything gained -- it's style over substance.  Having spent 35 years teaching an elective area to H.S. students, I learned long ago that a program of high quality and deep substance will outdraw and out achieve one based on rah rah and style. 

Indeed, times may be changing but quality never goes out of style.

Maybe the trick is to have high quality and deep substance alongside of rah rah and style. Wasn't that the Oakland A's winning in the early 1970s?

[Rod Carews Birthday]

Rah rah and style is fine if you have the other two.  It just doesn't work alone, and my fear is that the team becomes obsessed with the rah rah and forgets the important stuff. 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Are we going to get old school baseball again? Like stealing bases and squeeze plays and players actually putting the ball into play?!

[tony&rodney]

The Twins are for sale and if the sale goes through soon enough (March 15) there will be chatter within Twins Territory.

The Twins are rolling out a new media format. People will choose to buy if they are interested and a sale might help but a shiny new toy acquired via trade would receive significant press and be roundly debated and advertised. This would likely boost sales.

The season starts in late March and by May the Twins will have begun to show what type of team they are going to be for people interested in attending games or buying the media deal. A winning team is a positive but a plodding poor defensive team that waits for good things will not be a strong draw. I think we saw that last year. An exciting team will bolster both attendance and media sales and keep the Vikings off the frontal lobe for a bit longer. 

What does Falvey think?

[dxpavelka]

7 hours ago, tony&rodney said:

Dude. When it comes to baseball at this moment .... the times they are a changing.

and this.........

 

[Jocko87]

6 hours ago, Rod Carews Birthday said:

Rah rah and style is fine if you have the other two.  It just doesn't work alone, and my fear is that the team becomes obsessed with the rah rah and forgets the important stuff. 

The Padres... When the merry go round stops and you have 100m on the retired list.  Rah Rah, indeed.

[Trilla]

10 hours ago, Fatbat said:

A good history lesson and the twins would be wise to change with the times and not just follow the crowd. Selling out last year for short term $$$ was a disaster. Hopefully the new ownership isn't so short sighted! 

We all have our own opinions but if anyone has really watched, and is a student of the game, they would realize that Correa is a bargain for the salary he is paid. Let's not forget who the leader of this team really is.  There is plenty of money available to improve this team. The real culprit here is Derek Falvey, he continues to b.s. fans  into thinking the team is broke. Excuse me for thinking that if I want to sell my business why would I ever curtail efforts to increase its value? This whole off-season is typical Falvey laziness, indecision, and incompetence. Why do you think his good old boy Levine left town? I love my Twins. The new owners are going to clean this mess. Just because you do nothing and don't screw up doesn't mean you did a good job.

[Eris]

Baseball really misses opportunities to market itself to young audiences (the future). Too many playoff games are on cable and they start and end much to late to have younger audiences watch the game.  

[NYCTK]

9 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

The Padres... When the merry go round stops and you have 100m on the retired list.  Rah Rah, indeed.

They are both a much better team than the Twins and they have a significantly better fan support. Not to mention a significantly higher payroll still. The fact that they're now going through a messy ownership fight because their beloved owner died isn't a strike against the strategy. 

 

[Jocko87]

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

They are both a much better team than the Twins and they have a significantly better fan support. Not to mention a significantly higher payroll still. The fact that they're now going through a messy ownership fight because their beloved owner died isn't a strike against the strategy. 

 

Not to ceed to any of these points.

And yet, none of that will matter when the wheels fall off.

Will those fans still sell out for a 60 win team?

Bad spending always wins over time.

[NYCTK]

1 hour ago, Jocko87 said:

Not to ceed to any of these points.

And yet, none of that will matter when the wheels fall off.

Will those fans still sell out for a 60 win team?

Bad spending always wins over time.

They drew a lot more fans in the covid suppressed '21 season with a 79 win team than the Twins did in 2023 with a playoff team. 

There is such levels of apathy for the Twins, no one really cares about them. And that's all on the front office. 

 

[Jocko87]

17 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

They drew a lot more fans in the covid suppressed '21 season with a 79 win team than the Twins did in 2023 with a playoff team. 

There is such levels of apathy for the Twins, no one really cares about them. And that's all on the front office. 

 

Did you know San Diego was the only MLB team to have the market to itself?  No other major professional teams there.  It makes comparisons with anyone else much harder to make.

The point is, that the team with the most idea setup for maximizing revenue of an MLB franchise is still going to get defeated by irresponsible spending.  They can't operate the way they do without a loose pocketed billionaire funding it. 

Not one MLB team can spend at those levels without an outlier influx of cash, including the Dodgers.

To the point of the article, I agree, keeping people talking about you all the time is good.  Spending $340m to do it is not the way. 

Had the Twins finished the season on a high note, they could easily sit on their hands for the entire offseason and no one (outside Gleeman) would care.  Buzz would be buzzing.

[Finlander]

I don't get games on internet/streaming. I'll either listen to a game on radio, or I'll watch the occasional game if I drive into town and hit a local establishment that carries the broadcast.

Over the decades, much of the loyal Twins fan base has resided in outlying rural areas. These are the same areas that support the town baseball teams who would barnstorm the area in fun summer leagues. It's real baseball. No gimmicks or clown uniforms.

The constant rule changes are puzzling. Extra inning runner on second is blasphemous to the game in my opinion. I guess they're changing the game to sling more product on commercials or to appeal to the video age fans that need constant sensory overload.

Recently, I had the opportunity to watch PBA bowling for the first time in years. Wait, what?!? It's not even bowling. They quickly haul the ball to the line and fling it with two hands like throwing a bag of feed into the back of a truck. And the outfits, and the WWE "in your face" attitudes. If baseball is headed in this direction in order to be more entertaining, heaven help us.

Draft and develop talent. Teach and utilize fundamentals. And win. That should be all it takes. And enjoy some of the unique personalities along the way too (Mark Fidrych, Bill Lee, Al Hraboski, Billy Martin, etc).

One suggestion about trying to level the talent field a little. I know there is a tiered tax system in place for certain team payroll thresholds. Maybe some draft pick losses could be added too. I'm not advocating for taking money from the players - but merely to see the first 3 rounds (if 3 thresholds) or so of draft talent spread out more amongst the teams that can't afford a $300M payroll.

My two cents on a Monday before the coffee kicks in.

 

 

[Heiny]

What might be the most popular team in the NFL right now.  Even as a small to mid market team.  All NFL teams have near sell outs every week.  What might be the difference?  Hmmm, maybe the continuous winning?  Seems to me that would be the best place to start.

[Major League Ready]

4 hours ago, NYCTK said:

They are both a much better team than the Twins and they have a significantly better fan support. Not to mention a significantly higher payroll still. The fact that they're now going through a messy ownership fight because their beloved owner died isn't a strike against the strategy. 

 

I think it’s accurate to say most of us judge success based on making the playoffs and playoff success.  The Padres have won one playoff series in the past 15 years, same as the Twins.  They built the top rated farm system in MLB after being very bad for a decade.  They added players on deals that are extremely likely to be boat anchors for a few years.  The Machado deal was heavily weighted on the back-end of the deal.  He is only making $17M this year but his salary goes to $25M in 2026 and $39M for the following 7 years.   That’s likely to be ugly.  Darish will turn 39 this year.  He has four years and $77M remaining.  Joe Musgrove just turned 32 so he’s not that old but he only produced 1.4 WAR last year.  

They lost two important players from last year (Profar and Ha-Seong Kim)   Next year, they will lose Cease, King, and Arraez.  Their strategy gave them a short window and it sure looks like they are destined for failure or at best mediocrity for a number of years.  I would say this is a strike (or two) against their strategy.
 

[NYCTK]

2 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

Had the Twins finished the season on a high note, they could easily sit on their hands for the entire offseason and no one (outside Gleeman) would care.

This would be foolish even if they didn't get massively exposed at the end of the season. Just like it was foolish after the 2023 season. If you don't win the championship, there is room for improvement. 

Meanwhile the Twins sucked when the rubber hit the road, and their method of improvement has been losing players and crossing their fingers. Deep down, we all know how that's going to go. 

 

22 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Their strategy gave them a short window and it sure looks like they are destined for failure or at best mediocrity for a number of years.  I would say this is a strike (or two) against their strategy.

Ok...The Twins are already wallowing in mediocrity. So how many strikes is that? 

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

This would be foolish even if they didn't get massively exposed at the end of the season. Just like it was foolish after the 2023 season. If you don't win the championship, there is room for improvement. 

Meanwhile the Twins sucked when the rubber hit the road, and their method of improvement has been losing players and crossing their fingers. Deep down, we all know how that's going to go. 

 

Ok...The Twins are already wallowing in mediocrity. So how many strikes is that? 

I had absolutely no doubt that you would deflect.

[NYCTK]

55 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

I had absolutely no doubt that you would deflect.

Deflect from what? Your comment was: 

1. well actually, the Padres aren't any better than the twins based on this very narrow criteria. (they've been to an LCS in the last two decades if I'm not mistaken)

2. You don't like their contracts (ok, and?) 

3. Their big spending gave them a small window (contenders most of 5 years and counting and amongst the top of the league in attendance) 

4. You think they're destined to fail now. (ok, I guess it's hard to argue against your opinion? but anyone could say that about the Twins too) 

Tell me again how having had a good 5 year run where the team performed well, for the most part, and the fans were extremely excited was bad actually? 

[tony&rodney]

4 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

Did you know San Diego was the only MLB team to have the market to itself?  No other major professional teams there. 

Yah, I'm not buying that excuse. I'm from Minnesota and the lakes and fishing are a major draw in the summer. There are plenty of things to do, actually endless. At the end of the day people have a set amount of money they spend on entertainment each month for whatever purpose that may be. That is true for every place on the planet. The people of San Diego prefer/enjoy/like baseball more than the people of the Twins Cities. That isn't very controversial. The San Diego area easily has as many distractions as we have here and the beach is always an easy yes. I am not threatened by the fact that San Diego has supported their baseball team much more than the people of the Twin Cities. It is what is and in this case the numbers do not lie. For now at the very least the San Diego market, which is a fair amount smaller, supports their baseball team better than the we do here in Minnesota.

[NYCTK]

Just now, tony&rodney said:

Yah, I'm not buying that excuse. I'm from Minnesota and the lakes and fishing are a major draw in the summer. There are plenty of things to do, actually endless. At the end of the day people have a set amount of money they spend on entertainment each month for whatever purpose that may be. That is true for every place on the planet. The people of San Diego prefer/enjoy/like baseball more than the people of the Twins Cities. That isn't very controversial. The San Diego area easily has as many distractions as we have here and the beach is always an easy yes. I am not threatened by the fact that San Diego has supported their baseball team much more than the people of the Twin Cities. It is what is and in this case the numbers do not lie. For now at the very least the San Diego market, which is a fair amount smaller, supports their baseball team better than the we do here in Minnesota.

I wouldn't go so far as to say the people of San Diego like baseball more. But more importantly, the late owner of the Padres, and the Padres front office, gave the fans a reason to get excited about baseball. 

 

[tony&rodney]

11 minutes ago, NYCTK said:

I wouldn't go so far as to say the people of San Diego like baseball more. But more importantly, the late owner of the Padres, and the Padres front office, gave the fans a reason to get excited about baseball. 

 

Maybe not. Since the Padres have had a team they have drawn more than the average attendance more times than the Twins have. The Twins reigned supreme from 1961-1970, but the population has other interests more often than not. 

I believe that was the point of the Hayes article - the Twins could use a public relations boost from a player acquisition to go along with an announcement of the sale of the team. The public is fickle and some attention in the local media may spur a bit of conversation which could possibly lead to some renewed interest in the Twins.

[Jocko87]

16 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

Yah, I'm not buying that excuse. I'm from Minnesota and the lakes and fishing are a major draw in the summer. There are plenty of things to do, actually endless. At the end of the day people have a set amount of money they spend on entertainment each month for whatever purpose that may be. That is true for every place on the planet. The people of San Diego prefer/enjoy/like baseball more than the people of the Twins Cities. That isn't very controversial. The San Diego area easily has as many distractions as we have here and the beach is always an easy yes. I am not threatened by the fact that San Diego has supported their baseball team much more than the people of the Twin Cities. It is what is and in this case the numbers do not lie. For now at the very least the San Diego market, which is a fair amount smaller, supports their baseball team better than the we do here in Minnesota.

You cut off the part where I said that makes comparison very difficult.  

So you could argue against a point I wasn’t making. 

You know what else is different? Winter. 

[tony&rodney]

1 minute ago, Jocko87 said:

You cut off the part where I said that makes comparison very difficult.  

So you could argue against a point I wasn’t making. 

You know what else is different? Winter. 

Well, I initially just hit quote for the entire comment but it didn't seem necessary. No foul play was intended and sorry if it seemed so. I'm a Twins fan and not picking on Minnesota but San Diego does support their team more completely from the numbers. As for competition, there have been fifty plus years of economic studies that refute any benefit of a sports franchise to an area based on a simple principal. People have spending habits that include forking over their money for entertainment which is a constant whether there are ten teams or one or zero. The competition for entertainment dollars has been studied to death.

However, you have a very good point, winter is different.

Perhaps I lost the point you were making. Did I? Was it that Minnesota has more professional teams?

[Major League Ready]

The Padres have had (2) 90 win seasons in the last 20 years.  Only three other teams with 2 or less 90-win seasons.  Their win loss record for the last 20 years ranks 27th.   Their future looks bleak with a poor farm system and aging players on big salaries.  Who knows Machado could be the next nelson Cruz but the odds are that contract will hurt them badly for 5-7 years.  I would not hold them up as an example of how to run a franchise.  

[NYCTK]

38 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

The Padres have had (2) 90 win seasons in the last 20 years.  Only three other teams with 2 or less 90-win seasons.  Their win loss record for the last 20 years ranks 27th.   Their future looks bleak with a poor farm system and aging players on big salaries.  Who knows Machado could be the next nelson Cruz but the odds are that contract will hurt them badly for 5-7 years.  I would not hold them up as an example of how to run a franchise.  

Well, the Twins have won one "playoff" series in 23 years, and they couldn't even sell out those games. 

The Padres were arguably the second best team in baseball last season while the Twins were something like 69-79 against teams that weren't the worst team in major league history. 

So, why are you crapping on the Padres?

You're living in a glass house.