Tiers need to be rearranged

[Bad_Ash]

I did some research on teams and their revenue. All my data is from 3 private leagues: NABL, All-Star Mogul, and Mogul Enthusiast. Which is the equivalent of 19 complete seasons.
For each team I took their average revenue for each league, then averaged that(Ex. takes ATL's average revenue from the history screen in NABL, All-Star, and Mogul Enthusiast then calculate an average from that). This formula accounts for 3 different GM's of the same team to negate any particular outstanding success of a single GM. Anyways here are the results.

Rank-Team-Revenue average in the 3 leagues-current tier rank

1. NYA-713-1
2. BOS-705-1
3. ATL-666-1
4. LA-632-1
5. NYN-616-1
6. CLE-608-1

7. COL-601-2
8. STL-517-2
9. AZ-493-2
10. TEX-475-2
11. SF-472-3 *
12. TOR-441-3 *

13. HOU-439-3
14. SEA-432-2 *
15. BAL-423-3
16. TB-405-5 **
17. PIT-337-4 *
18. SD-337-4 *

19. ANA-336-4
20. KC-319-5 *
21. CIN-316-4
22. CHA-307-3 *
23. FLA-306-5 *
24. PHI-305-4

25. MON-305-5
26. DET-287-3 **
27. CHN-275-2 ***
28. OAK-251-4 *
29. MIN-246-5
30. MIL-232-5

Number of * denotes how many tiers the team is off by.

My suggest for new tiers

Tier 1
NYA
BOS
ATL
LA
NYN
CLE

Tier 2
COL
STL
AZ
TEX
HOU
SEA

Tier 3
TOR
SF
BAL
TB
PIT
SD

Tier 4
ANA
KC
CIN
CHA
FLA
PHI

Tier 5
MON
DET
CHN
OAK
MIN
MIL

This would be the simplest way to fix the tier systems. I still think a formula that compares winning percentage to revenue would determine the best overall worth of a GM.

These data was based on NABL 2001-2007, All-Star Mogul 2001-2007, and Mogul Enthusiast 2001-2005.

[nysteinbrenner]

Ash:

There's another thread on this somewhere on the board... I'm going to do some research through a sports trade publication I subscribe to that has what seem to be pretty accurate numbers on team revenues, expenses, etc.

Once I find it, I'll be posting this real-life information for BBMO-related uses, but I'd suspect one of them would be to reorganize the tier structures.

[Bad_Ash]

Thanks, I tried to find financial info and attendence records for MLB but couldn't find it and gave up.

[ASchatz]

The answer is not to rearrange the tiers - the answer is to rearrange the ratings on the teams so they jive with reality.

Look at real life. The Cubs sell out nearly every game with the most devoted fan base in baseball - one that attends whether the team wins or not. They also have high TV ratings. They make sense as a tier 2 team, but the game doesn't seem to want to put them there.

Likewise, it doesn't make sense to have Tampa in tier 3. They make sense in tier 4 or 5. But in order to make that make sense within the game, Tampa has to be re-rated to have a smaller fan base.

Aaron

[Bad_Ash]

I agree with you ASchatz. If we had some idea of the actual financial figures of Major League teams that would even be more helpful, such as attendence and ticket sales, consessions sales, and tv revenue.

[Slugger222]

Great study! But I think that all you need to do is to make Chi(N) and Detroit. Look what happens to the "Star Ratings" when these three teams end up with revenue more in line with their teir ranking......

Rank-Team-Revenue average in the 3 leagues-current tier rank

1. NYA-713-1
2. BOS-705-1
3. ATL-666-1
4. LA-632-1
5. NYN-616-1
6. CLE-608-1

7. COL-601-2
8. STL-517-2
9. AZ-493-2
10. CHN-480-2 -----------Adjusted to 480 from 275
11. TEX-475-2
12. SF-472-3 *

13. TOR-441-3
14. HOU-439-3
15. SEA-432-2 *
16. DET-425-3 --------------Adjusted to 425 from 287
17. BAL-423-3
18. TB-405-5 **

19. PIT-337-4
20. SD-337-4
21. ANA-336-4
22. KC-319-5 *
23. CIN-316-4
24. CHA-307-3 *

25. FLA-306-5
26. PHI-305-4
27. MON-305-5
28. OAK-251-4 *
29. MIN-246-5
30. MIL-232-5

Also, don't forget that in NABL, Detroit ran that experiment where he let nearly all of his payroll drop off,and played with a bunch of AAA rejects for a year - winning only 10 games. That hurt Detroit's revenue dramatically for a couple of seasons.

Looking at this, CHA also looks out of wack a bit.

I would say that if the average revenue is more than 100 points off the average for the tier, one of two things has happened:

A: You've had a string of great/incompitant managers...
B: The game is biased against those teams, making it difficult, or impossible to meet that revenue.....

[sudden]

I'd rather see them change the ratings so that if you're running a team like Chicago (either one) and you field a decent to good team and put your ticket prices at a reasonable level you can draw a good crowd. That would seem to be more in line with testing someone's GM skill rather than rejigging the Tier rankings.

I also think that you should be able to increase your attendance through fan loyalty from performing consistently well (like Cleveland and Atlanta did). I don't think that owners of teams like either Chicago team should be stuck in a perpetual down market.

However, if they can't fix this then I support some rejigging of the Tiers to correct the obvious wrongs.

Great study, Badash. Nice to have some facts to go with the opinions!

[nysteinbrenner]

Below is what I've found so far data-wise for 2000 and in one case, 2001, for approximate data regarding attendance, gate revenue, and naming rights revenue for MLB teams:

HIGHEST AVERAGE ATTENDANCE:
42,670 - Cleveland
41,191 - St. Louis
40,930 - San Francisco
40,681 - Baltimore
40,564 - Colorado
40,346 - New York (AL)
39,930 - Atlanta
38,868 - Seattle
37,730 - Houston
37,171 - Los Angeles
36,327 - Arizona
35,900 - New York (NL)
35,002 - Texas
34,869 - Chicago (NL)
31,926 - Boston
31,431 - Cincinnati
31,281 - Detroit
30,834 - Pittsburgh (2001)
29,915 - San Diego
25,518 - Anaheim
24,347 - Chicago (NL)
22,468 - Toronto
21,344 - Oakland
20,715 - Kansas City
20,160 - Philadelphia
19,363 - Tampa
19,919 - Milwaukee (now in new park)
15,229 - Florida
13,083 - Minnesota
11,435 - Montreal

HIGHEST TOTAL GATE RECEIPTS:
83,725,422 - New York (AL)
73,765,067 - Seattle
73,262,287 - Boston
71,130,201 - Cleveland
70,417,609 - San Francisco
69,637,114 - Pittsburgh (2001)
68,017,368 - New York (NL)
64,320,899 - Baltimore
63,974,474 - Atlanta
62,913,062 - Detroit
61,153,342 - Houston
58,722,277 - St. Louis
55,078,891 - Texas
54,214,215 - Colorado
48,955,918 - Chicago (NL)
48,786,915 - Arizona
46,487,045 - Los Angeles
31,549,400 - San Diego
29,591,346 - Toronto
27,853,526 - Chicago (AL)
27,680,750 - Cincinnati
27,263,426 - Anaheim
21,933,658 - Philadelphia
19,998,261 - Tampa
19,732,280 - Kansas City
19,622,879 - Oakland
18,442,838 - Milwaukee (now in new park)
15,265,625 - Florida
9,887,141 - Minnesota
9,531,246 - Montreal

ANNUAL NAMING RIGHTS REVENUE (by venue; team revenue may differ):
3,300,000 - Houston
2,500,000 - Anaheim
2,300,000 - San Francisco
2,200,000 - Arizona
2,200,000 - Detroit
2,060,000 - Milwaukee
2,000,000 - Pittsburgh
1,800,000 - Seattle
1,500,000 - Colorado
1,200,000 - Oakland
1,100,000 - Tampa
1,000,000 - Cincinnati
900,000 - San Diego
700,000 - Cleveland
?,???,??? - Atlanta (revenue is there, but amount unknown)

I'm continuing my look into the numbers, but thought I'd share what I've found so far. I hope to be able to cull some numbers out of local television and radio revenues (though that'll be very difficult in some cases since the team owns the system the games are broadcast on (such as YankeeNets ownership of the new "YES" network, for example).

Anyway, based on what I have above, on pure stadium-based revenue alone, the tiers would look something like this...

TIER ONE:
NY (AL), Seattle, Boston, Cleveland, San Francisco, New York (NL).

TIER TWO:
Pittsburgh (the 2001 team, but not prior), Baltimore, Atlanta, Detroit, Houston and St. Louis.

TIER THREE:
Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Chicago (NL), San Diego, Los Angeles.

TIER FOUR:
Toronto, Chicago (AL), Anaheim, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Tampa.

TIER FIVE:
Kansas City, Oakland, Milwaukee (the 2000 team; the 2001 team probably belongs in Tier 2, replacing St.Louis), Oakland, Florida, Minnesota and Montreal.

[BBM]

I hope the tier change wont affect those earlier leagues, because some teams DID dersevered what tier they was in, and just because it just changed week ago, doesn't mean it will have to affect forever?!!

[nysteinbrenner]

However to add on my previous post, just rudimentary knowledge of the various team's television deals leads me to believe that the tiering should be staggered more along these lines:

TIER ONE:
New York (AL), Boston, Cleveland, Atlanta, New York (NL), Chicago (NL).

TIER TWO:
San Francisco, Seattle, Baltimore, St. Louis, Houston, Colorado, Arizona, Los Angeles.

TIER THREE:
Pittsburgh, Texas, San Diego, Toronto, Chicago (AL), Anaheim.

TIER FOUR:
Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Oakland, Milwaukee, Kansas City.

TIER FIVE:
Tampa, Florida, Minnesota, Montreal.

Yeah, the tiers aren't evenly numbered, but they aren't in reality, either.

[BBM]

where is detroit?

[nysteinbrenner]

Detroit should be demoted to AAA. :D

Seriously though, based on their numbers and local TV deal, they probably would fit in with Tier 3. While their 2000 gate revenue was decent, their local TV deal isn't all that appealing.

I'm still researching for local TV revenues though, looking for some hard-core numbers to work from. Based on what I've learned so far though, it seems as if TV revenue would put the Yankees, Red Sox and Dodgers in a tier all to themselves - and the gap between them and "Tier II" teams would be just a little larger than the grand canyon.

[ASchatz]

It's sometimes hard to measure based on TV revenue. Remember that ATL and CHN own their own national cable stations which own games, so they don't pay themselves rights fees.

Aaron

[Bad_Ash]

The Braves don't have the checkbook they used to have. I think Time Warner bought all of Ted Turner's stuff so the Braves don't have that unlimited checkbook anymore. Obvisiously I'm not an expert on the situation, I've just heard the Braves have their payroll on a budget now.

[exep]

Great subject and research! You guys are amazing.

The attendance figures, fan loyalty and revenue can all be influenced greatly by the GM in a few years. The factors that can't be changed are city size, overall population and stadium size; factors that should also be taken into consideration; the game lasts more than two seasons. I'm sure someone can factor in the unchageable limits

ExEP, Chicago Expats, Mogel Enthusiast League

[nysteinbrenner]

Originally posted by ASchatz
It's sometimes hard to measure based on TV revenue. Remember that ATL and CHN own their own national cable stations which own games, so they don't pay themselves rights fees.

Aaron

This is exactly why I'm having so much difficulty finding accurate numbers with it. In cases like Pittsburgh, the TV arrangements are pretty cut-and-dry, but in the cases of Boston, the Chicago Cubs, Atlanta and so forth, it's practically impossible because the two are so intertwined.

For example, the Cubs "deal" with Tribune gives them a set amount of revenue, but it's reported that the amount is roughly 1/3rd of what their local TV rights would go for on an open market.

The Yankees arrangement prior to 2000 is quite clear - $47 million a year through MSG. But in 2001 its clouded due to a re-working of the deal, and for 2002 and beyond it'll be virtually impossible to accurately calculate TV revenue due to the "YES" network and YankeeNets. Aye, carumba!

And yet, my research into Atlanta is even more puzzling still, as the Braves, Hawks and what was Ted Turner's (now AOL Time Warner's) television networks were, at least for a time, under the umbrella of the same entity - making local TV revenue impossible to get an accurate bead on.

But I am undaunted. I will find what I can and put it forth, and I encourage anyone else interested to join me in the "search for truth." :)

[onethumb]

According to today's Detroit news:

Forbes magazine reported on all 30 teams estimated revenue and operating profit. For the Tigers, revenue on the year was 120.8 million, compared to a league average of 105.9 million. Operating profit was 12.1 million compared to 4.3 million league average.

[dturkenk]

Here's the total data from Forbes for the 2000 season.



Rank Team Current value ($mil)1 One-year change in value % Debt/ value %3 Revenue ($mil) Operating income ($mil)4

1 New York Yankees 635 16 40 192.4 21.9
2 New York Mets 454 44 13 162 21.3
3 Atlanta Braves 407 5 10 145.5 7.7
4 Los Angeles Dodgers 381 17 11 131.3 -17.4
5 Cleveland Indians 372 2 36 142.9 4.2
6 Texas Rangers 342 16 51 126.5 7.4
7 Boston Red Sox 339 20 12 125.7 -7.3
8 Baltimore Orioles 335 -3 45 124 2.1
9 Colorado Rockies 334 9 12 119.1 6.4
10 San Francisco Giants 333 40 59 138.8 27.4
11 Seattle Mariners 332 14 51 138.3 17.8
12 Houston Astros 318 14 50 122.2 22.3
13 Detroit Tigers 290 45 66 120.8 12.1
14 Chicago Cubs 247 2 16 112.4 9.1
15 Arizona Diamondbacks 245 -8 63 109.1 -7.9
16 St Louis Cardinals 243 11 16 110.5 -3
17 Chicago White Sox 213 28 19 92.6 17.8
18 Pittsburgh Pirates 211 31 43 70.4 2.3
19 Milwaukee Brewers 209 25 67 69.6 -1.6
20 Anaheim Angels 198 2 13 94.4 -8.9
21 Cincinnati Reds 187 7 35 77.8 6.9
22 San Diego Padres 176 -11 108 84 -8
23 Toronto Blue Jays 161 -1 25 80.3 -5.9
24 Philadelphia Phillies 158 6 25 79.2 -1.1
25 Tampa Bay Devil Rays 150 -8 66 81.3 -11.3
26 Oakland Athletics 149 11 40 74.7 5.2
27 Kansas City Royals 138 13 29 72.6 4.3
28 Florida Marlins 128 3 30 67.3 6.5
29 Minnesota Twins 99 9 84 58 5.8
30 Montreal Expos 92 3 73 53.9 -8.1
263 12 105.9 4.3

This is ranked by total team value, but if you rank by revenue you get this order



Team Tier
1. New York Yankees 1
2. New York Mets 1
3. Atlanta Braves 1
4. Cleveland Indians 1
5. San Francisco Giants 3
6. Seattle Mariners 2
7. Los Angeles Dodgers 1
8. Texas Rangers 2
9. Boston Red Sox 1
10. Baltimore Orioles 3
11. Houston Astros 3
12. Detroit Tigers 3
13. Colorado Rockies 2
14. Chicago Cubs 2
15. St Louis Cardinals 2
16. Arizona Diamondbacks 2
17. Anaheim Angels 4
18. Chicago White Sox 3
19. San Diego Padres 4
20. Tampa Bay Devil Rays 5
21. Toronto Blue Jays 3
22. Philadelphia Phillies 4
23. Cincinnati Reds 4
24. Oakland Athletics 4
25. Kansas City Royals 5
26. Pittsburgh Pirates 4
27. Milwaukee Brewers 5
28. Florida Marlins 5
29. Minnesota Twins 5
30. Montreal Expos 5



ok so the tiers lined up badly.. but you can get the idea

So the Tigers were 12th in revenue, but the Cubbies were even more surprisingly 14th in revenue. Of course some of these numbers will change (Pittsburgh and Milwaukee) should move up the list because of new stadiums.

I'd be interested in seeing this data over a few years, but I wasn't able to find the data on forbes for previous years.

You can also find the attendance and media revenue if you click on the team's name.
http://www.forbes.com/baseball/

[nysteinbrenner]

I've been looking for the latest Forbes list - good find. Unfortunately the Forbes lists aren't completely accurate - their off by "give or take" 5% either way, as was evidenced by their predecessor (Financial World did the list prior to 1998, when Forbes bought them out) assessing the Cleveland Indians (then a public company) and over-estimating their total revenue by nearly $15 million.

But it's as good a jumping off point as anywhere I suppose. I'll take all the information I've collected so far and try to produce lists broken down by specific category - I have the feeling the final "re-tiering" (if any) will be based on a combination of all the factors we're currently going over.