Comments on: Atlanta Braves For Sale

By: Travis

Travis — Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:39:51 +0000

We need to petition Ted to buy back his team.
Any ideas on where to start?

By: J Bryans

J Bryans — Sun, 18 Dec 2005 02:57:39 +0000

People often forget stars put people in the stands. The Braves are known for resurrecting careers because they won't spend money to get a star quality first baseman or left fielder. They consistantly rely on young players and over the hill players to win baseball games. Time Warner has shown they have no interest in the team winning because they know that die hard fans such as myself, will still fork over a hundred bucks to watch the AA braves team play.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:53:10 +0000

Yep. Lofton was one of several players who came to the Braves and promptly had the worst year of their career (Reggie Sanders and Dan Kolb come to mind). Grissom was an Atlanta native and Justice was developed in the Braves farm system. Embree was actually a pretty decent contributor, though.

By: ICallMasICM

ICallMasICM — Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:47:45 +0000

Cleveland Indians traded Alan Embree and Kenny Lofton to the Atlanta Braves for Marquis Grissom and Dave Justice; 3/25/97

It would seem odd that Justice is the only one who isn't still hanging on out of that group.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:15:42 +0000

They traded Justice for next to nothing. Glavine went to a horrible team, although I agree his better days were behind him. Furcal wasn't worth the going rate if you have an $80 million payroll but would have been nice to keep.

By: ICallMasICM

ICallMasICM — Thu, 15 Dec 2005 17:56:55 +0000

having to let their stars.....'David Justice, Tom Glavine, and Rafael Furcal go' Which of these would you have kept at the time? Justice was coming off a year that he missed the almost the whole season. He had 2 good years after he left in '97 and '2000. He was out of baseball after '02. Glavine hasn't had a winning season since he left. Furcal is a low on base guy for a leadoff hitter and made a lot of errors every year before last year. He's never hit .300 or had more than 61 RBI and he got superstar money. The guy I can't figure them letting go was Mazzone.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:30:57 +0000

Bogn: The White Sox have been dreadful for most of the last century. Ditto the cross-town Cubs. As I argue below, sports is a business, to be sure, but one unlike other businesses. And, surely, the National Football League--by far the most profitable sports enterprise in the country--is not "run as a communist collective"? Bryan: They've done quite well at winning division titles by assembling solid, versatile lineups. It has been a decade since they've been truly competitive for a World Series ring, though. Were Ted Turner still the owner, he'd shell out a few million late in the season to sign a key free agent to fill a hole. Time Warner won't do that because have a fixed budget they're willing to spend on their "product." Turner saw the team as more than a profit maker but as an extension of himself. In this TW era, the Braves are constantly having to let their stars, even home grown ones like David Justice, Tom Glavine, and Rafael Furcal go, though, because they can't afford to sign them under the corporate scheme. The Braves have done reasonably well despite these shackles because of a great organization, headed by a great GM and manager. With a $100 million budget vice $80 million, though, they'd almost certainly be better.

By: bryan

bryan — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:23:04 +0000

Wait, is this the same team that has won 14 straight division championships? How this doesn't equate with an emphasis on winning is a mystery to me. james, perhaps you'd explain.

By: Bogn

Bogn — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:13:29 +0000

Corporate ownership of a sports team, with the focus on the bottom line rather than winning, is a major obstacle in professional sports, especially the only major professional sport without a salary cap and meaningful revenue sharing.

If you are so anti-capitalist, maybe you would like to see the MLB nationalized and run as a communist collective with massive government subsidies?

Furthermore, every MLB team is fixated, first and foremost on the bottom line. The best team in baseball last year, the Chicago White Sox, are owned by a corporate entity and have been tremendously profitable.

They became the most dominant team--not by being unprofitable--but by being smart business men. They assembled the right talent, made money, and prevailed on the field.

Any problems with the Braves lie more in mismanagement than with who actually owns the team.

By: JS Thomas

JS Thomas — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:31:41 +0000

As a baseball fan in general and a Braves fan in particular, I would love to see Time Warner sell them. Corporate ownership and winning baseball simply doesn't mix. The best owners are the ones who share the same focus as the best players: a desire to win that trumps the desire to make money.