The lost baseball teams

[Pete from Boston]

Don't forget the original Major League Baltimore Orioles became the New York Highlanders and then adopted a team name that I cannot mention and moved to Bronx County, N.Y.

Almost.  The Highlanders (later Yankees–go ahead, you can say it) played twenty seasons in Manhattan before heading over to the Bronx.

[spooky]

Don't forget the original Major League Baltimore Orioles became the New York Highlanders and then adopted a team name that I cannot mention and moved to Bronx County, N.Y.

Almost.  The Highlanders (later Yankees–go ahead, you can say it) played twenty seasons in Manhattan before heading over to the Bronx.

The shift from Highlanders to Yankees happened during that twenty year residency in Manhattan, coinciding with the beginning of the ten year period where the team shared the Polo Grounds with the Giants.

[texaskdog]

I guess what I was getting at as to the Pilots was that I don't know whether the Brewers ever acknowledge their year in Seattle. Their website mostly ignores it, though of course since the Pilots only existed for that one year there isn't much to acknowledge. The Baltimore franchise almost completely ignores its prior existence in St. Louis, whereas some of the other teams that moved don't hesitate to acknowledge their history. The San Francisco Giants even donated money to restore the John T. Brush Stairway on Coogan's Bluff in New York in 2013.

I went to Seattle Pilots game at RFK stadium against the expansion Washington Senators. Seattle won

Awesome

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I firmly believe the Dodgers might return to Brooklyn someday, because the move out of Brooklyn was the most controversial in US major league sports history. The Dodgers' departure from one of NYC's 5 boroughs devastated this community. In 1962, the NL granted a team, the Mets, to fill the void left by the Giants and Dodgers' moves, and the Mets are in Long Island (Queens close to Brooklyn). Understandably, there's a regional rivalry between Brooklyn/Queens and Manhattan/Bronx, the "blue collar" vs wealthy boroughs in NYC history.

It'll never happen. The Dodgers are LA's team now and have been for 57 years. Only the old-timers and probably some bitter Brooklyners still associate the Dodgers with Brooklyn in a modern context.

[Rothman]

I firmly believe the Dodgers might return to Brooklyn someday, because the move out of Brooklyn was the most controversial in US major league sports history. The Dodgers' departure from one of NYC's 5 boroughs devastated this community. In 1962, the NL granted a team, the Mets, to fill the void left by the Giants and Dodgers' moves, and the Mets are in Long Island (Queens close to Brooklyn). Understandably, there's a regional rivalry between Brooklyn/Queens and Manhattan/Bronx, the "blue collar" vs wealthy boroughs in NYC history.

It'll never happen. The Dodgers are LA's team now and have been for 57 years. Only the old-timers and probably some bitter Brooklyners still associate the Dodgers with Brooklyn in a modern context.

I dunno.  I'm not that old of an old timer and the LA Dodgers still sounds a little odd to me, despite the fact that they moved before I was born.

[spooky]

The Mets would move to Brooklyn before the Dodgers would.

[Henry]

I firmly believe the Dodgers might return to Brooklyn someday, because the move out of Brooklyn was the most controversial in US major league sports history. The Dodgers' departure from one of NYC's 5 boroughs devastated this community. In 1962, the NL granted a team, the Mets, to fill the void left by the Giants and Dodgers' moves, and the Mets are in Long Island (Queens close to Brooklyn). Understandably, there's a regional rivalry between Brooklyn/Queens and Manhattan/Bronx, the "blue collar" vs wealthy boroughs in NYC history.

It'll never happen. The Dodgers are LA's team now and have been for 57 years. Only the old-timers and probably some bitter Brooklyners still associate the Dodgers with Brooklyn in a modern context.

I dunno.  I'm not that old of an old timer and the LA Dodgers still sounds a little odd to me, despite the fact that they moved before I was born.

On a related note, why is it that I sometimes see the current New York Giants team being referred to as the New York Football Giants, when the baseball Giants moved to San Francisco 57 years ago?

And yes, I think that the Dodgers should have Brooklyn as their affiliate. But at least they got major-league sports back with the NBA's Nets.

[jeffandnicole]

I firmly believe the Dodgers might return to Brooklyn someday, because the move out of Brooklyn was the most controversial in US major league sports history. The Dodgers' departure from one of NYC's 5 boroughs devastated this community. In 1962, the NL granted a team, the Mets, to fill the void left by the Giants and Dodgers' moves, and the Mets are in Long Island (Queens close to Brooklyn). Understandably, there's a regional rivalry between Brooklyn/Queens and Manhattan/Bronx, the "blue collar" vs wealthy boroughs in NYC history.

It'll never happen. The Dodgers are LA's team now and have been for 57 years. Only the old-timers and probably some bitter Brooklyners still associate the Dodgers with Brooklyn in a modern context.

I dunno.  I'm not that old of an old timer and the LA Dodgers still sounds a little odd to me, despite the fact that they moved before I was born.

On a related note, why is it that I sometimes see the current New York Giants team being referred to as the New York Football Giants, when the baseball Giants moved to San Francisco 57 years ago?

That's a Chris Berman thing, who is on ESPN.  No one knows why he does it.

[davewiecking]

On a related note, why is it that I sometimes see the current New York Giants team being referred to as the New York Football Giants, when the baseball Giants moved to San Francisco 57 years ago?

It is their legal name...

[Pete from Boston]

On a related note, why is it that I sometimes see the current New York Giants team being referred to as the New York Football Giants, when the baseball Giants moved to San Francisco 57 years ago?

It is their legal name...

True.  Even twenty years after the baseball Giants' departure, this was not rare in common parlance.  Long a formality, the team now embraces the full name and displays it prominently at field level.  Half the current Giants ownership dates to 1925–I guess tradition is a big deal.

Kind of makes me wish the New Jersey Nets publicly used "Meadowlands Basketball Company."

[Thing 342]

Speaking of MLB expansion: http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13256319/rob-manfred-sees-expansion-mlb-future

I could definitely see an expansion to 32 teams, with teams in Charlotte (an AL promotion of the Knights) and Montreal (the return of the NL Expos), and a split into eight divisions of four teams. 

AL East: BOS, NYY, BAL, TOR
AL South: TB, CLT, HOU, TEX
AL North: CWS, MIN, CLE, DET
AL West: OAK, LAA, SEA, KC

NL East: NYM, PHI, PIT, MON
NL South: ATL, MIA, WSH, CIN
NL North: CHC, STL, MIL, COL
NL West: SF, SD, LAD, AZ

[Henry]

Speaking of MLB expansion: http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13256319/rob-manfred-sees-expansion-mlb-future

I could definitely see an expansion to 32 teams, with teams in Charlotte (an AL promotion of the Knights) and Montreal (the return of the NL Expos), and a split into eight divisions of four teams. 

AL East: BOS, NYY, BAL, TOR
AL South: TB, CLT, HOU, TEX
AL North: CWS, MIN, CLE, DET
AL West: OAK, LAA, SEA, KC

NL East: NYM, PHI, PIT, MON
NL South: ATL, MIA, WSH, CIN
NL North: CHC, STL, MIL, COL
NL West: SF, SD, LAD, AZ

I'm all for that too!

[spooky]

I really like that eight division plan.

[wphiii]

I was so interested in this book but it was such a boring read.

[Road Hog]

The interesting thing is baseball went 50 years (1903, the start of the AL, to 1953) without a single team relocating to a different city. Once the Browns moved, it set off a wave of changes over the next 20 years. Then there was another period of stability that's been ongoing for 40+ years, the exception being the Expos-Nationals. (Not counting expansion, obviously).

The only candidates for relocation I see are Tampa Bay and Oakland. Tampa Bay's stadium situation is ridiculous and the A's have explored moving down the coast to San Jose.

[Henry]

The problem is, the Giants have territorial rights to San Jose and have been threatening to block the A's from moving there. An alternative would be to build a new stadium in Oakland and play in San Francisco during construction, which the A's should consider anyway if the NFL's Raiders leave. As for Tampa Bay, they need to resolve it quickly, or they might end up being another Seattle.

[Thing 342]

The interesting thing is baseball went 50 years (1903, the start of the AL, to 1953) without a single team relocating to a different city. Once the Browns moved, it set off a wave of changes over the next 20 years. Then there was another period of stability that's been ongoing for 40+ years, the exception being the Expos-Nationals. (Not counting expansion, obviously).

The only candidates for relocation I see are Tampa Bay and Oakland. Tampa Bay's stadium situation is ridiculous and the A's have explored moving down the coast to San Jose.

I think the reason for all of the relocation in the 50's and 60's was due to a combination of the the dominance of East Coast teams during that period , sudden realization that the west coast was a viable media market, resulting in the movement of a bunch of teams from multi-team cities (such as the Philadelphia Athletics, the Boston Braves, the Brooklyn Dodgers and the NY Giants) seeking to escape from the shadow of their more popular neighbors for greener pastures out west.

[DTComposer]

The interesting thing is baseball went 50 years (1903, the start of the AL, to 1953) without a single team relocating to a different city. Once the Browns moved, it set off a wave of changes over the next 20 years. Then there was another period of stability that's been ongoing for 40+ years, the exception being the Expos-Nationals. (Not counting expansion, obviously).

The only candidates for relocation I see are Tampa Bay and Oakland. Tampa Bay's stadium situation is ridiculous and the A's have explored moving down the coast to San Jose.

I think the reason for all of the relocation in the 50's and 60's was due to a combination of the the dominance of East Coast teams during that period , sudden realization that the west coast was a viable media market, resulting in the movement of a bunch of teams from multi-team cities (such as the Philadelphia Athletics, the Boston Braves, the Brooklyn Dodgers and the NY Giants) seeking to escape from the shadow of their more popular neighbors for greener pastures out west.

My understanding is not that it was a "sudden realization" of viability as much as transportation - it made sense to have teams in a limited geographic area when travel between cities was still done on trains. Air travel made Los Angeles, San Francisco and the markets that followed logistically viable.

[Stephane Dumas]

The interesting thing is baseball went 50 years (1903, the start of the AL, to 1953) without a single team relocating to a different city. Once the Browns moved, it set off a wave of changes over the next 20 years. Then there was another period of stability that's been ongoing for 40+ years, the exception being the Expos-Nationals. (Not counting expansion, obviously).

The only candidates for relocation I see are Tampa Bay and Oakland. Tampa Bay's stadium situation is ridiculous and the A's have explored moving down the coast to San Jose.

I think the reason for all of the relocation in the 50's and 60's was due to a combination of the the dominance of East Coast teams during that period , sudden realization that the west coast was a viable media market, resulting in the movement of a bunch of teams from multi-team cities (such as the Philadelphia Athletics, the Boston Braves, the Brooklyn Dodgers and the NY Giants) seeking to escape from the shadow of their more popular neighbors for greener pastures out west.

My understanding is not that it was a "sudden realization" of viability as much as transportation - it made sense to have teams in a limited geographic area when travel between cities was still done on trains. Air travel made Los Angeles, San Francisco and the markets that followed logistically viable.

There was also talks of a third league called the Continental League but the National and American Leagues added teams in the west and the south to prevent the birth of this league. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_League

[triplemultiplex]

Speaking of MLB expansion: http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/13256319/rob-manfred-sees-expansion-mlb-future

Expansion?  Only if national interest in the game is also expanding, which it is not.
The MLB has too many media markets with multiple teams.  New York, Chicago, LA, SF-SJ-Oak, Bal-Wash; do they really need two teams in all of those metro areas?  (apologies to Baltimore and Washington, but c'mon, you're right on top of each other.)
The Expos should've moved to Charlotte to give the Braves a regional rival.  Nashville would've been good, too.

I am on board with moving the A's somewhere, but not because the taxpayers won't buy them a new stadium.  That's a bullshit reason.  You do it because you don't need two teams in that market.
If you're gonna move the Rays, do it because no one goes to baseball games in Florida after March, not because they won't replace that cruddy "old" dome.

[Henry]

At least expansion would make the leagues even again, and thus decrease the dependency on interleague series, which has gone from a midseason event to an everyday occurrence. I hated the Astros' move to the AL, but the Brewers' move to the NL made sense because they could play the Braves during the regular season instead of having to wait until October for that chance.

[jeffandnicole]

At least expansion would make the leagues even again, and thus decrease the dependency on interleague series, which has gone from a midseason event to an everyday occurrence. I hated the Astros' move to the AL, but the Brewers' move to the NL made sense because they could play the Braves during the regular season instead of having to wait until October for that chance.

I never understood the hatred people have with interleague play, as every other major sport incorporates it without any issue.

And the first person to say anything along the lines of tradition can then start explaining every other rule that has been changed over the past 100 years or so.

[Mr_Northside]

I never understood the hatred people have with interleague play, as every other major sport incorporates it without any issue.
And the first person to say anything along the lines of tradition can then start explaining every other rule that has been changed over the past 100 years or so.

Yeah... I feel the same way.  Maybe it's cause I was never really into baseball until a few years ago, but I never totally understood the disdain some have for it.  I guess I view the MLB as one league and the AL & NL as glorified conferences (in relation to other sports) - Yes, one league having the DH and not the other is a major difference (and probably one of the things that those who don't like interleague would quote), but otherwise it's 30 teams featuring, in theory, the best of the best.  With a season of 162 games, there is no valid excuse that there should be teams that never play each other during the course of a couple of seasons.  (I think the NFL does an excellent job in regards to inter-conference play).

Just my opinion.

[wphiii]

I really enjoy Interleague play, gives me a chance to see players in person that I otherwise wouldn't be able to see.

It's just still irritating that the league refuses to consider Pittsburgh and Cleveland "natural rivals."

[Henry]

I really enjoy Interleague play, gives me a chance to see players in person that I otherwise wouldn't be able to see.

It's just still irritating that the league refuses to consider Pittsburgh and Cleveland "natural rivals."

Probably because Indians-Pirates does not have the same rivalry aspects as Browns-Steelers. And Cleveland's real natural rival is Cincinnati anyway.

BTW, I like interleague play because it allows for unlimited possibilities to be played out during the regular season.