STEVE COHEN HAD THE DOUGH TO GIVE IT A GO
“Boy, have I got some value for YOU! Step right, and buy a franchise!”
History.com had an article regarding the remarkably small $10 million purchase of the Yankees by George Steinbrenner and other investors in early 1973:
“…a 12-member group headed by George Steinbrenner purchases the New York Yankees for $10 million from Columbia Broadcasting System, which had owned the team since 1964. The group includes CBS’s Yankees president Michael Burke, who briefly serves in that role under Steinbrenner. Known by many as "The Boss," Steinbrenner goes on to become one of the more controversial owners in sports history.
“Steinbrenner’s initial investment was actually fairly small: $168,000, which was a little less than a 2% ownership stake. However, over the years he wrestled majority ownership of the team from others. Four months after Steinbrenner's purchase, Burke resigned his position. When he died in 2010, Steinbrenner owned 57% of the team.”
$168,000??
What about…the Mets?
Tremendous increase in team franchise value under the Wilpons, but not as much of an increase as Steinbrenner’s heist (source: Wikipedia)
“In 1980, Wilpon bought a 1% stake in the Mets when Charles Shipman Payson sold the team, with publishing company Doubleday & Co. holding the remaining interest. He gradually increased his stake to 5%. During the Mets championship season of 1986, Doubleday president Nelson Doubleday Jr. sold Doubleday & Co. to Bertelsmann AG.
Wilpon had a right of first refusal in the event of a sale and threatened to exercise it. In the resulting settlement, Doubleday and Wilpon agreed to purchase the Mets for $81 million, with each holding a 50% stake.
In 2002, the Wilpon family purchased the remaining 50% of the Mets from Doubleday for $391 million, giving Wilpon sole ownership of the Mets.
In September 2020, a deal was reached for billionaire hedge fund manager Steve Cohen to purchase 95% of the Mets from Wilpon, his son, C.O.O. Jeff Wilpon, and co-owner Saul Katz, for approximately $2.4 billion.
On March 17, 2026, CNBC posted its top 10 MLB team franchise values for 2026, which factors 2025 revenue, debt value and more.
The top two teams are unchanged since the 2025 ranking, though the top five saw one shift. The New York Yankees are the league's most valuable team at $9 billion, according to CNBC senior sports reporter Michael Ozanian.
The Los Angeles Dodgers remained second at $8 billion, but saw a significant one-year value change percentage after being valued at $5.8 billion last year. The Chicago Cubs claimed the third spot with a $5.25 billion valuation.
TheBoston Red Sox dropping one spot down with a $5 billion mark, increasing just 6% to the Cubs' 17%. The San Francisco Giants didn't increase at all at $3.8 billion, but still retained the fifth spot.
Rounding out the top 10, in order, are the Philadelphia Phillies ($3.6B), New York Mets ($3.55B), Houston Astros ($3.3B), Atlanta Braves ($3.25B) and San Diego Padres($3.1B).
My, oh my, how MLB franchise values have exploded over the decades.
That being said, if the Mets had teams consistently as strong as the Dodgers or Braves, my guess is the franchise would be worth at least $2 billion to $3 billion more than the March estimate.
Also, I wish I had picked up a 0.5% stake of those Yankees in 1973.
That roughly $50,000 investment would now be worth $45 million.
WHERE IS ALEX RAMIREZ? WAIT, I FOUND HIM!
The former Mets top 10 prospect fizzled in AA in 2024-25, and departed.
I just realized he is in White Sox AA.
He is hitting:
.294/.336/.460. Just 50 Ks in 58 games. 24 of 28 in steals.
Those are better numbers than any supposed prospect in the Mets minors.
He is still 23.
What we all would really want to know is:
How the heck did he hit a lousy .213 in 2024-25 in Binghamton AA, and jump 80 POINTS in White Sox AA?
DAVID STEARNS SHOULD SURE WANT TO KNOW, TOO.
13 comments:
I am still puzzled as to how Alex Ramirez was let go and is now hitting far better in AA elsewhere than any current Binghamton player is? Or than a certain touted current Mets prospect who has fanned 105 times in 70 games, while hitting 90 points lower. We are not in Denmark, but something is sure rotten.
Franchise value slides when your “ace” surrenders 10 runs in a few innings.
You want a franchise-boosting ace?
Try the Yanks’ Cam Schlittler, 8-3, 1.71 ERA, 109 Ks in 95 IP.
Cam was a seventh rounder in 2022 220th overall, the draft year of Parada and Jett.
And, besides Parada and Sproat, also picked before Schlittler was picked by the Yanks, the Mets picked Morabito, Sproat, Reimer, D’Andre Smith, Tyler Stuart, and Jonah Tong.
That Mets draft is starting to look like too many other franchise value killers.
Ramirez CONSISTENTLY hit like shite over many Mets years. If I recall, you wanted him kaput too.
He deserved to be dumped and lauded for this recovery
What is Peralta's trade value now?
Mack, I guess my question comes down to this: Many Mets prospects now hit like Ramirez did in 2024 and 2025.
Is the organization screwing up player development wholesale? This could be a one-time fluke…or the sign of wholesale screw ups.
Starting to inch up. His improving season slug % is still just .314.
May he duplicate his current successful SHORT AAA stretch and turn it into a long one. Then, it will be truly rising.
Tomas Nido one won a batting title. That didn’t help his value much.
There are probably a number of explanations, but the real issue is how to change it, not how to explain it. After all, Explaining it tells you what went wrong, not how to make a change. What changes need to be made?
First, always, is look at your drafting strategies. What are you looking for and why. And you do have to look backwards to see who else fit those goals you had in mind and see how they have fared with the orgs that drafted them compared to the ones you drafted. This will give you a hint as to whether you missed something in drafting or in development or both. You can probably constrain this activity to picks made in the first five rounds to start. See what info is revealed.
Then you look at development of players. Here I will add my main focus that I have been pressing all along. There are two essential parts to development: 1. Mapping mechanics: 2.Teaching/learning.
I have no visibility as to how the Mets do either, so I can't draw any helpful conclusions. I will say this, though. I do know something about both of these issues and have decided to do a short series on these aspects of development: At the moment, stimulated by a note I received from RVH, I am thinking of breaking it into two major parts: Physical and Mental (Cognitive). We know much more about both in general than we have in the past. We also have technology galore, but we have precious little depth of understanding of the connection between the measurement tools and the underlying physical and biomechanics. I'll give some examples of what I mean especially from areas in sports in which the tools have been employed longer and yet there is so much variance among coaches as to what changes the information calls for. I will explain why I think the technology can be useful but needs to take a back seat in figuring out how to work with players to make them better. So maybe an overall three major section set of posts: Physical, Cognitive, How coaches and players work together.
I think it's systematic
Jules, sounds interesting.
I did a lot of draft articles in the past. One strategy the Mets had for far too long was drafting undersized, underpowered hitters who failed almost every single time. But, the issue is complex. Yet other organizations get it right far more often.
My bad. I read your comment as Parada, not Peralta. Yes, Peralta’s TV is in the toilette.
I think it's systematic
Yes! It does no good to lament the failures of the past. It does great good to learn from them and plot the course of improvement.
Thought exercise: which would skill you prioritize for hitters: athleticism or bat-to-ball skills?
Post a Comment