UPDATE: Maybe the Rangers-FOX deal is not 20-years, $3 billion

22 Comments

UPDATE: Evan Grant of the Dallas Morning News hears that the Rangers’ deal with
FOX is actually worth $1.5-1.6 billion, not $3 billion
as reported by Bob Nightengale of USA Today, but that there are some incentives and escalators and stuff.  Even if it stays flat at $1.5 billion, however, that makes it, on average, a $75 million deal, which is over and above every team’s TV deal with a non-affiliated network of which I’m aware (remember: the Dodgers get $45 million; the Mariners are reported to get around $40 million). So, still a great deal for Texas, even at its lowest.

4:54 PM: I shoulda listened to those killjoys who go on about how things that sound too good to be true likely being too good to be true. A FOX spokesman tells Sports Business Journal that the figures reported by USA Today earlier this afternoon were “wildly inflated.”

Of course, the definition of “wildly inflated” matters here too. If the truth of the matter is that the deal is for, say, $50M a year over 20 years, sure, USA Today was out to lunch and this deal would represent a healthy, but not necessary crazy figure for the Rangers. If, on the other hand the truth is that the deal starts at $50M or $75 million but increases
every year and inflates until it’s still a $3 billion deal, then it’s
still kind of nuts
.  The devil is in the details, as they say.

By they way: I was chatting with Gleeman as this update came down a few minutes ago. He observed that it’s entirely possible that there will be no Rangers games on television at all in 20 years and, in fact, there may be no television. I think he meant that everything could go to some streaming internet or wireless kind of system that renders television as we know it obsolete. It’s possible, however, that he has inside information on an imminent nuclear war or zombie apocalypse.  Which, I don’t need to tell you, would totally be a buzzkill for Rangers baseball.

1:58 P.M.: It’s going to be hilarious when FOX executives realize that the contract they just signed was with the Rangers, not the Cowboys or Vivid Video or something else more marketable than baseball is thought to be:

The Texas Rangers, who clinched their first division title in 11
years over the weekend, just might start making this an annual routine
considering their giant financial windfall.

The Rangers,
cash-strapped for years with owner Tom Hicks, have signed a 20-year
extension with Fox Sports Southwest that will guarantee them $3 billion.

$150 million a year!  To put that in perspective, the Dodgers get about $ 45 million a year from FOX. The Yankees get less than $100 million from YES (though, obviously, they own a big chunk of the network so it’s not apples-apples). I doubt any team currently gets anything like $150 million from a non-affiliated network.

Two questions that immediately spring to mind in light of this deal:

  • Is it any wonder why so many people were willing to jump into protracted litigation to get a piece of this team? and
  • How bad a businessman is Tom Hicks if he couldn’t make the Rangers solvent with that kind of scratch available?

Whatever the case, with this TV deal, the Rangers shouldn’t be lumped in with the mid-market teams going forward. They should be considered a high-dollar player the moment the first check comes in.

Justin Turner is a postseason monster

Jamie Squire/Getty Images
Leave a comment

A not-insignificant amount of the Dodgers’ success in recent years has to do with the emergence of Justin Turner. In his first five seasons with the Orioles and Mets, he was a forgettable infielder who had versatility, but no power. The Mets non-tendered him after the 2013 season, a move they now really regret.

In four regular seasons since, as a Dodger, Turner has hit an aggregate .303/.378/.502. His 162-game averages over those four seasons: 23 home runs, 36 doubles, 83 RBI, 80 runs scored. And he’s also a pretty good third baseman, it turns out. The Dodgers have averaged 95 wins per season over the past four years.

Turner, 32, has gotten better and better with each passing year. This year, he drew more walks (59) than strikeouts (56), a club only five other players (min. 300 PA) belonged to, and he trailed only Joey Votto (1.61) in BB/K ratio (1.05). He zoomed past his previous career-high in OPS, finishing at .945. His .415 on-base percentage was fourth-best in baseball. His batting average was fifth-best and only nine points behind NL batting champion Charlie Blackmon.

It doesn’t seem possible, but Turner has been even better in the postseason. He exemplified that with his walk-off home run to win Game 2 of the NLCS against the Cubs. Overall, entering Wednesday night’s action, he was batting .363/.474/.613 in 97 postseason plate appearances. In Game 4, he went 2-for-2 with two walks, a single, and a solo home run. That increases his postseason slash line to .378/.495/.659, now across 101 plate appearances. That’s a 1.154 OPS. The career-high regular season OPS for future first-ballot Hall of Famer Albert Pujols was 1.114 in 2008, when he won his third career MVP Award. Statistically, in the postseason, Turner hits slightly better than Pujols did in the prime of his career. Of course, we should adjust for leagues and parks and all that, but to even be in that neighborhood is incredible.

In the age of stats, the concept of “clutch” has rightfully eroded. We don’t really allow players to ascend to godlike levels anymore like the way we did Derek Jeter, for instance. (Jeter’s career OPS in the playoffs, by the way, was a comparatively pitiful .838.) Turner isn’t clutch; he’s just a damn good hitter whose careful approach at the plate has allowed him to shine in the postseason and the Dodgers can’t imagine life without him.