We truly love everything Jason Hanselman and Dock of the Rays publishes. Their newest article, titled 2015 Pitcher Values, is no different. Hanselman took the time to see how the Tampa Bay Rays hurlers ranked against the rest of the league utilizing grounders, liners and fly balls to the various fields. It is a well planned and well written piece that all of you baseball fans can appreciate. It doesn’t hurt that his avatar is a photo of someone ― presumably Hanselman ― wearing a Jawbreaker shirt. Do yourselves a favor and give it a read.
Tropicana Field is shown in the shadow of the skyline of downtown St. Petersburg in 2013. (Photo Credit: Tampa Bay Times)
St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman presented the city council another agreement with the Tampa Bay Rays on Thursday, in an attempt to bridge the divide between the city and the team in their search for a new home.
As expected, the deal is similar to Kriseman’s original proposal, which would have cost the team up to $24-million to leave Tropicana Field before 2027. However, the new understanding includes a few tweaks, which are highlighted below.
The proposal includes incentives that would allow the team to share in redevelopment revenue on the current property that the city would put in escrow. The team would get half if it stays in the city up to or beyond 2027. If they leave before the end of the lease the team will receive nothing. Some have estimated the total to be up to $1-billion.
The team will be expected to tell the city how it will evaluate stadium locations, while also giving the city six months to make a case for the current Tropicana Field location (including the potential development revenue).
The Rays will be required to pay half the cost for developing a master plan for the Tropicana field site, with or without a new stadium.
The deal would expire after three years if the team decides to stay or can’t find a new home.
There are no changes to the annual penalty payments if the team leaves St. Petersburg before 2027, remaining at approximately $2-million per season ― $4-million for 2018, $3-million a year for 2019-2022, $2-million for 2023-2026, $0 for 2027. Noah Pransky (Shadow of the Stadium) was quick to point that that figure has been poorly reported and is also significantly less than what other teams have paid to break their stadium contracts.
The document, which can be read in its entirety, follows.
As I wrote Wednesday, the proposal was vetted among all eight council members in a series of meetings this week attended by the mayor, Rays President Brian Auld and City Attorney Jackie Kovilaritch.
Next up, Mayor Kriseman says he expects the reworked deal to pass at City Council next Thursday. That could open the floodgates to stadium exploration in both Pinellas and Tampa. Check back for more details on this story.
Tropicana Field is shown in the shadow of the skyline of downtown St. Petersburg in 2013. (Photo Credit: Tampa Bay Times)Mayor Rick Kriseman appears to be fast tracking the Tampa Bay Rays’ stadium hopes, after the recent inauguration of the two newest members of the St. Petersburg City Council.
Mtg. w council members all week to discuss a new agreement w/Rays. Productive so far. Despite reports, no vote happening this week.
According to Charlie Frago (Tampa Bay Times) Kriseman, Rays president Brian Auld and City Attorney Jackie Kovilaritch met separately with two City Council members to gauge their temperature on a new deal to allow the team to look for a new stadium site outside of St. Petersburg.
Kriseman is expected to brief the remaining six council members before the board’s first meeting of the year on Thursday. In short, the mayor is making sure he has the five votes he needs to finalize a deal that would allow the team to explore new stadium sites in both Pinellas and Tampa.
While officials from both the city of St. Petersburg and the Rays have met privately over the last few months, any details of a “new” deal have been kept secret, as (per Noah Pransky, Shadow of the Stadium) the city is taking extreme steps not to create any written documents through the negotiating process to avoid creating public records.
Yet despite the lack of official information on the matter, what a new deal might look like was hinted at by council member Charlie Gerdes, who said the proposal wasn’t markedly different than the previously pitched plan which would have cost the Rays about $2-million for every year they left Tropicana Field before 2027.
I wouldn’t say there was anything brand new, Gerdes said. There’s been some refinement.
Pransky offered three other possible stadium deal scenarios:
Still, some legwork on the part of the mayor will need to be done before any understanding is voted upon. All eight council members will be briefed through Wednesday, giving them the opportunity to voice any objections or tweaks.
Three members — Montanari, Jim Kennedy, and Steve Kornell — have voiced objections to letting the Rays search for a new home, however, Kornell is open to new ideas. Amy Foster, who initially voted against a deal, changed her position in May, citing a need to resolve the standoff and let the city move forward. The other four members — Gerdes, Karl Nurse, Darden Rice, and Lisa Wheeler-Brown — have voiced support of a deal between the city and the Rays.
Both sides indicated that any deal would probably come later in the month, although it could come as early as January 14 ― two weeks ahead of schedule (give or take).
It should be noted, Kriseman will not be in town for the council’s third meeting of the month on January 21, meaning any vote would either have to come before or after.
Former Rays (Athletics and Astros too) hurler Scott Kazmir was acquired by the Los Angeles Dodgers on Wednesday. (Photo Credit: Unknown)The Los Angeles Dodgers announced on Wednesday that they inked a deal with LHP Scott Kazmir to a three-year contract. The contract guarantees Kazmir a total of $48-million, although he also obtains an opt-out clause after the first season, and there are deferrals in the deal that will be spread evenly over a six year term.
Kazmir, who is expected to fill a void in the Dodgers’ rotation, will join Clayton Kershaw, Brett Anderson, Alex Wood and, if healthy, Hyun-jin Ryu, thus creating the potential for an entirely left-handed starting five.
Los Angeles pursued a reunion with Zack Greinke, but lost out on an eleventh-hour push from the Arizona Diamondbacks. When that deal fell through, the Dodgers made a strong push for Hisashi Iwakuma, although concerns about a failed physical prompted L.A. to try to restructure the deal. Iwakuma instead chose to reunite with Seattle, agreeing to a one-year deal with a pair of options, sending Andrew Friedman and company back to the drawing board. While there was some public interest in Jake Odorizzi by the Dodgers, L.A. alternatively elected to sign the free-agent Kazmir.
Taking into consideration the newly minted agreement with 27 year-old RHP Kenta Maeda, compounded with the Kazmir acquisition, I’d argue that the Dodgers are likely out on discussions for Odorizzi. It’s just as well, the Rays look to have a rather solid rotation going into Spring Training, with Chris Archer, Jake Odorizzi, Matt Moore, Erasmo Ramirez and Drew Smyly all but assured a spot in the front five.
Los Angeles is still in the market for a reliever, and General Manager Farhan Zaidi was candid on that search, saying:
We have some young guys in our pen who had some ups and downs, and I think they’ll grow from that and be better in 2016. Adding some veteran presence in a way that makes sense for the composition of our roster and pen is something we’ll continue to look at.
The Dodgers initially worked out a deal for Aroldis Chapman at the Winter Meetings, however, they backed out of the pact amidst reports of domestic violence by Chapman. It bears mentioning both LHP Jake McGee and RHP Brad Boxberger have been linked with Los Angeles in some capacity, yet a deal for either reliever does not appear to be imminent at the moment.
Noteworthiness
An aside, thank you for a wonderful 2015! We’re looking forward to big things in the new year, and we hope you continue to come along for the ride.
The Tampa Bay Rays made the front cover of the Tampa Bay Times on Friday, December 25, 2015. (Photo Credit: Anthony Ateek/X-Rays Spex)
The Tampa Bay Rays made the front cover of the Times on Friday, in an article featuring the results of a Tampa Bay Times/10 News WTSP survey of Tampa Bay area citizens on how much they value the team.
The article can be read in its entirety here. The online version contains questions that 650 individuals across Tampa Bay were asked, as well as full results. It should be noted, there was a 4% margin of error within the phone survey.
Highlights and Takeaways
― More Pinellas County residents said they cared about keeping the team than Hillsborough County residents. 48% of Pinellas residents care a lot about keeping the Rays in the region, while only 32% of Hillsborough residents felt the same. 31% said they “didn’t care at all.”
― 36% of Pinellas residents most prefer a new stadium to be built in downtown St. Petersburg, compared to 32% for northern St. Petersburg (Carrillon or the Derby Lane) and just 9% for the Hillsborough County Fairgrounds.
― 39% of Hillsborough residents most prefer a new stadium to be built at the Hillsborough County Fairgrounds, compared to 17% in downtown Tampa and 16% in downtown St. Petersburg.
― According to the Charlie Frago (Tampa Bay Times) penned article, St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman said that he thinks the best future home for the team is on its current site, Tropicana Field. He cites easy interstate access and a booming downtown whose renaissance is spreading west along Central Avenue:
When you look at the opportunities to be there, it makes perfect sense.
― Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn broke with the dominant opinion espoused by the Hillsborough residents, who preferred a Hillsborough County Fairgrounds location, saying a stadium in that location likely wouldn’t spur other development in the area:
Just look at Raymond James Stadium, Buckhorn said. That’s a perfect example. You have Chili’s and Mons Venus and that’s about it.
― Piggy-backing on Buckhorn’s quote (above), there is no evidence of a positive economic impact when we speak in terms of building a stadium on a given parcel of land. Rather, it would make more sense to build a facility in an area where continual growth is inherent ― one in which, say, 85 acres of property is available to be redeveloped. You know, one that’s surrounded by restaurants, breweries, bars, and family friendly entertainment. If only there was a place like that in the region…sigh.
