Braves or Red Sox?

Marbleheader · Mar 12, 2018

If you had asked in March of 2004 it would have been a discussion, but all of the atrociously painful experiences as a Red Sox fan paid off in such a glorious way, it's definitely Red Sox for me.

Jerry’s Curl · Mar 12, 2018

I grew up as a Braves fan in Florida long before we had an MLB franchise. I remember going to the old Fultco. stadium watching the Braves when they drew 7,000 fans in the late 80’s. We always got there for batting practice and I got some great autographs from the visiting team including Mike Schmidt and Tim Raines.

Lose Remerswaal · Mar 12, 2018

I hate you for asking this question as it is painful to answer, but i think Marbleheader pretty much had my answer.

Much as I would have loved to see Hank Aaron play every day, the success of the last 15 years has been so sweet i can't see enjoying the other option more than this

E5 Yaz · Mar 12, 2018

Lose Remerswaal said:
Much as I would have loved to see Hank Aaron play every day ...

I would have lo loved to see Aaron play every day. I'm not sure I would have loved to see Boston in 1973-74 as he chased Ruth's record

tims4wins · Mar 12, 2018

Marbleheader said:
If you had asked ~~in March of~~ the day of October 17 2004 it would have been a ~~discussion~~ no brainer, but all of the atrociously painful experiences as a Red Sox fan paid off in such a glorious way, it's definitely Red Sox for me.

Fixed

section15 · Mar 12, 2018

Red Sox. The Braves had a park that was built in 1915 and was nowhere nearly as nice as Fenway, according to most.

1) Fenway had been rebuilt in 1934. In 1949-50-51 it was only 15-16 years old. Braves Field was showing its age.
2) The Sox had a greater following
3) Perini was losing close to $1 million a year, and had a "yellow brick road" to Milwaukee - a gold mine awaiting.
4) Tom Yawkey also realized the power of media. Television is a two-edged sword - more on that below - you can use it to promote your product, but if you're not careful, it can harm live attendance. The Sox were also the first to put all games, home and away, on radio, and this proved popular. He knew that TV was going to be a major factor and he was in a position to be the only team in town.
5) Boston wasn't big enough to support two teams going forward.

So he won the battle. Also - Perini did have a live gate goldmine when he got to Milwaukee - BUT - did not know how to harness and exploit the power of television. He foolishly thought that putting ANY games on TV would hurt his gate. Then, when the Braves went from being a fantastic team to a mediocre one - attendance dropped dramatically. The "boomer kids" whose parents weren't baseball fans weren't interested, they hadn't grown up watching the Braves on TV.

Had he agreed to put 15-25 games on TV (which was FREE in those days) - he might have built a future audience.

The current Red Sox ownership should realize this - with the increasing number of cord-cutters, as well as those homes that can't afford cable - they're skipping over a significant number of future fans.

Mugsy's Jock · Mar 12, 2018

First, I enjoyed reading this and thinking about it for a second, so thanks JMOH.

Second, it was only a second because Marbleheader had exactly the right answer in just one sentence in the first response.

But third... as somebody who works in television and has always rued the fact there are no TV jobs really suitable for me in my favorite city, the "Ted Turner buys WSBK" thing got me thinking. What if TBS and TNT had emerged in Boston? All my problems would've been solved.

Except Turner was heavily drawn to Atlanta by the low tax rate, cheap labor, and favorable business environment in Georgia. No amount of alternate history could see those factors emerging in Massachusetts. [And thank God for that.]

Marbleheader · Mar 12, 2018

Random fact: The Braves chose to play the 1914 World Series at Fenway.

Cuzittt · Mar 12, 2018

Marbleheader said:
Random fact: The Braves chose to play the 1914 World Series at Fenway.

Paradoxically... the Red Sox hosted the 1915 World Series at.... Braves Field.

Mighty Joe Young · Mar 12, 2018

It’s an easy choice in that my early RedSox exposure was via WTIC’s 50000 wats - which would not have existed in this scenario.

The Talented Allen Ripley · Mar 12, 2018

John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
The thing that sucks is that if the Red Sox allowed the Braves to play in Fenway for a few years while a new stadium was built, we would have seen it all.

I know your statement was meant as a hypothetical, but to expand on it, could Boston/New England even support two MLB franchises? My initial reaction is no, but I'm genuinely interested in any discussion on the topic.

SumnerH · Mar 12, 2018

Cuzittt said:
Paradoxically... the Red Sox hosted the 1915 World Series at.... Braves Field.

That's cool.

For those wondering why, Braves Field was built during the 1915 season. It had more seating capacity than Fenway, hence the Sox decision to play the Series there.

The Braves played at the South End Grounds to start 1914, but actually switched to Fenway in mid-August (and remained there for the Series, as noted) as the crowds got bigger during the stretch run.

Red(s)HawksFan · Mar 12, 2018

The Allented Mr Ripley said:
I know your statement was meant as a hypothetical, but to expand on it, could Boston/New England even support two MLB franchises? My initial reaction is no, but I'm genuinely interested in any discussion on the topic.

I agree, I don't think it could. Honestly, I think if the Braves had gotten their new stadium and stayed in town through the 50s and 60s, the Red Sox very likely would have been the franchise to go. Like JMOH points out in the opening post, a young Hank Aaron combined with Spahn and Matthews in the 50s would have been exciting to watch.

In the meantime, Yawkey more or less completely checked out as the team ran itself into the ground in the late 50s and early 60s. Attendance cratered in the early/mid 60s. Have to think that that happening while another team, even a moderately successful one, was across town and it would have been even worse. I bet they're gone before Dick O'Connell could be promoted to GM and the Impossible Dream never happens.

JimD · Mar 12, 2018

Mugsy's Jock said:
But third... as somebody who works in television and has always rued the fact there are no TV jobs really suitable for me in my favorite city, the "Ted Turner buys WSBK" thing got me thinking. What if TBS and TNT had emerged in Boston? All my problems would've been solved.

Except Turner was heavily drawn to Atlanta by the low tax rate, cheap labor, and favorable business environment in Georgia. No amount of alternate history could see those factors emerging in Massachusetts. [And thank God for that.]

In this alternate scenario, doesn't Turner just buy the 'Atlanta Red Sox'?

dynomite · Mar 12, 2018

The Allented Mr Ripley said:
I know your statement was meant as a hypothetical, but to expand on it, could Boston/New England even support two MLB franchises? My initial reaction is no, but I'm genuinely interested in any discussion on the topic.

It’s an interesting question.

I think the simplest answer is: we probably don’t have enough people.

The only 3 markets that have 2 MLB teams ( New York, Los Angeles, Chicago) are also the top 3 in metro area population (20, 13, 9.5 million respectively).

The greater Boston/southern NH region is ranked 10th, at just 4.7 million. We’re smaller than the Atlanta and Miami regions. Still, our region might be able to support a 2nd team, especially once you factor in Rhode Island and northern CT. After all, small markets (~2 million) support teams in Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Cincinnati.

Ultimately it seems that the league would rather expand to the biggest markets without teams like Charlotte, NC or Portland, Oregon.

The Talented Allen Ripley · Mar 12, 2018

I think this is as dialed-in a baseball market as you're going to find, but it's that way because of the region's intense relationship with the Red Sox. If there had been another team around to divide that market before 1967, maybe it's the Sox who leave town, as RHF suggests.

I think it would be awesome if the Braves had stayed, though. On my ride home from work every night I get on the Pike eastbound at Exit 20, whose onramp points directly at Nickerson (née Braves) Field's bleachers, and I think how cool it would be if this were a two-team town.

Seabass · Mar 12, 2018

A long time ago someone on this website said that the correct answer to every poll on SoSH is Pedro Martinez. That person was, and always will be, correct. The Braves had some great teams and they seem to be on the precipice of putting together a great team soon, but they have had zero Pedros.

DeweyWins · Mar 12, 2018

I voted Red Sox because whether that team was in Boston, Milwaukee, Atlanta, Kathmandu or Timbuktu, it was the team that sparked my interest in baseball when that spark had not previously existed. Having discovered 10+ generations of family from Maine/northern Massachusetts Bay Colony, if the only team in Boston was the Braves, I'd probably find I had two teams, instead of one, to call my own.

Here's another what if...

It wasn't all that unusual for teams to gain players from other leagues that happened to be in the same city. Early AL Boston teams had players from the Braves. What if we had the best/worst of both worlds and managed to see the Braves/Red Sox unite as a single franchise?

I'm picturing:

"Spahn and Sain and Teddy Ballgame"
Hank and Yaz, the not so Impossible Dream
Knucksie baffles the Big Red Machine in Game 7 of '75
Gerald Perry pinch running for Buckner in the 10th, fields Mookie's grounder cleanly, and Dewey hits a solo shot in the 11th with Assenmacher getting Dykstra to weekly ground out to Spike Owen to finish off the Mets in the bottom half of the 11th.

On the other hand, I can ALSO picture:

the Mookie Ball going through Bob Horner's legs
a boneheaded choice of Oberkfell over Boggs at 3B
Maddux signing with the team that offered him $6 million more than the Braves (you know what team I'm talking about)
if we had all these great players, how many other great players would we have lost in the draft to worse teams.

It's a fun ride, imagination.

Norm Siebern · Mar 12, 2018

My Dad was a huge Braves fan before they left, so if they stayed I probably would have gone Braves because of that alone. He took me to my first Red Sox game in 1967, then he died a year later. My baseball fandom is directly linked to my Dad. I have a Mitchell and Ness Boston Braves hat I got a long time ago in my Dad’s honor.

Aside from that, for me, it’s the name on the front of the jersey when they are on the road. I would root for the team from Boston. If that were the Red Sox, then that’s my team. If that were the Braves, then that’s my team. What they do on the field is secondary to where that home field is.

By the way, great question JMOH. Fun to think about and brought back some nice memories. Thanks.

Hawk68 · Mar 12, 2018

"A person can be half-French and half-Arab and simultaneously even a citizen of two countries. It is more difficult to be half-Catholic and half-Muslim."

Samuel P. Huntington
The Clash of Civilizations
Foreign Affairs, 1993

Professor Huntington makes it easy. Red Sox.

pedro1918 · Mar 12, 2018

I am glad that I have never participated in the tomahawk chop. Point: Red Sox.

SumnerH · Mar 12, 2018

pedro1918 said:
I am glad that I have never participated in the tomahawk chop. Point: Red Sox.

When I was looking up the stadium stuff earlier, I found that Braves Field was nicknamed “the Wigwam”. That’s kind of…yuck.

glasspusher · Mar 12, 2018

Cuzittt said:
Paradoxically... the Red Sox hosted the 1915 World Series at.... Braves Field.

Yep, 1914 and 1915, Boston beats Philadelphia in the World Series.

They said that that rookie left-hander Ruth would have pitched in a Game 6, except a game 6 wasn't necessary.

glasspusher · Mar 12, 2018

Does Hank Aaron break the color barrier for good in the early 1970s, and become a Boston treasure? That would have been nice.

glasspusher · Mar 12, 2018

BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
It’s an easy choice in that my early RedSox exposure was via WTIC’s 50000 wats - which would not have existed in this scenario.

WTIC Hartford, 1080, The Pulse of New England. How I loved listening to that broadcast from central NJ, having to deal with bleed in from WHN 1050, New York's only country station. Ugh.

MuzzyField · Mar 12, 2018

BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
It’s an easy choice in that my early RedSox exposure was via WTIC’s 50000 wats - which would not have existed in this scenario.

WTIC was only 50000 watts from sunrise to sunset.
The nightly antenna switch down to 10,000 watts made reception fun. I had to use paper route money on a GE SuperRadio (premium AM reception) to keep the games listenable and it turned out I was also able to discover the broadcasts from teams on the real 50,000 watt 24-hours/day clear channel frequencies. Like the Tigers, Cardinals, and Pirates.

Mighty Joe Young · Mar 12, 2018

MuzzyField said:
WTIC was only 50000 watts from sunrise to sunset.
The nightly antenna switch down to 10,000 watts made reception fun. I had to use paper route money on a GE SuperRadio (premium AM reception) to keep the games listenable and it turned out I was also able to discover the broadcasts from teams on the real 50,000 watt 24-hours/day clear channel frequencies. Like the Tigers, Cardinals, and Pirates.

I think the 50,000 watts thing was part of their station promos. Regardless, it was a really strong signal which was easily accessible here in Nova Scotia. It was easily the strongest one I could find . Usually had to wait till after dark though. We're an hour ahead so the signal was usually available by the fourth inning for home games.

MuzzyField · Mar 12, 2018

BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
I think the 50,000 watts thing was part of their station promos. Regardless, it was a really strong signal which was easily accessible here in Nova Scotia. It was easily the strongest one I could find . Usually had to wait till after dark though. We're an hour ahead so the signal was usually available by the fourth inning for home games.

That’s the fun of AM at night in the summer. You can get the reduced signal in Nova Scotia and just down the road in Waterbury it was like they turned off the transmitter.
It turns out WTIC is licensed as a clear-channel station. The station decided to power down to the minimum allowed 10,000 watts at night. I guess to lower their electric bill? Do they still do that?

Mighty Joe Young · Mar 12, 2018

MuzzyField said:
That’s the fun of AM at night in the summer. You can get the reduced signal in Nova Scotia and just down the road in Waterbury it was like they turned off the transmitter.
It turns out WTIC is licensed as a clear-channel station. The station decided to power down to the minimum allowed 10,000 watts at night. I guess to lower their electric bill? Do they still do that?

Can't speak from recent experience .. this was in the late sixties and seventies .. AKA pre cable TV

Marciano490 · Mar 12, 2018

dynomite said:
It’s an interesting question.

I think the simplest answer is: we probably don’t have enough people.

The only 3 markets that have 2 MLB teams ( New York, Los Angeles, Chicago) are also the top 3 in metro area population (20, 13, 9.5 million respectively).

The greater Boston/southern NH region is ranked 10th, at just 4.7 million. We’re smaller than the Atlanta and Miami regions. Still, our region might be able to support a 2nd team, especially once you factor in Rhode Island and northern CT. After all, small markets (~2 million) support teams in Milwaukee, Cleveland, and Cincinnati.

Ultimately it seems that the league would rather expand to the biggest markets without teams like Charlotte, NC or Portland, Oregon.

I always wonder why fans in one city with two teams pick one and hate the other. I always thought if there was any team repping Boston, I’d root for them or check out their games. I went to BU, but if BC was playing Minnesota in hockey, I’d still root local.

Mighty Joe Young · Mar 12, 2018

Marciano490 said:
I always wonder why fans in one city with two teams pick one and hate the other. I always thought if there was any team repping Boston, I’d root for them or check out their games. I went to BU, but if BC was playing Minnesota in hockey, I’d still root local.

Yanks/Mets, Cubs/White Sox , Liverpool/Everton, City/United etc.. there does seem to be a trend here. It's all tribal.

Archer1979 · Mar 12, 2018

I'm not sure I could have taken losing to the Yankees as many times as the Braves did in the late 90's. Those were some great teams with only the 1997 World Series win to show for it. Definitely the Sox for me.

Rasputin · Mar 13, 2018

Honestly, it was at 2004 that I made the decision. It was such a remarkable occurrence that the fact it's been duplicated twice in Chicago since is largely immaterial.

Well, partially duplicated. It's gonna be a long, long time before someone else comes back from being down three games.

I gotta weigh that against having Ask the Manager go national and it's a tough, tough choice.

TheBoomah · Mar 13, 2018

John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
- Ted Turner buys WSBK TV-38 and turns it into Superstation SBK. "Ask the Manager" goes national.

You throw in Dana Hersey & The Movie Loft and I'll be a-Tomahawk choppin'.

Jerry’s Curl · Mar 13, 2018

The Braves had Skip & Chip Caray as announcers, doesn’t get more exciting than that.

Average Reds · Mar 13, 2018

I grew up in Philadelphia but, as a kid, used to spend a ton of time going through my father's scrapbooks from his youth. I still have them.

These cover the years 1944-1949. Three entire scrapbooks of newspaper clippings, interviews, box scores and anything he could get his hands on. I'd say that more than 90% is devoted to the Red Sox. The rest is focused on the Providence Steamrollers. The only mention of the Braves is the 1948 World Series box scores.

Red Sox.

mauf · Mar 13, 2018

Easy question to answer if you’re under 50 (like me) and would’ve missed Aaron and Spahn. Might be a close call if the ‘90s Braves had enjoyed even average postseason luck.

Al Zarilla · Mar 13, 2018

glasspusher said:
Does Hank Aaron break the color barrier for good in the early 1970s, and become a Boston treasure? That would have been nice.

Or he might have been somewhat ignored like Bill Russell and his great Celtics teams, who rarely sold out the Garden while the average Bruins were outdrawing them. If you want to go Boston is more of a hockey town, well, the Bird Celtics sold out all the time. Put Russell next to Bird (and McHale and Ainge, Walton) and you can immediately see why, Boston.

The Red Sox were just more popular than the Braves in Boston. The Braves were a World Series team in 1948 and attendance got a lot better, in large part also because the war was over. However, their attendance fell way off as soon as they looked like losers, or even a .500 team again. My father in law preferred the Braves, but it was largely because he was from Brighton (closer to Braves Field). As soon as they moved to Milwaukee, he was all Red Sox,

JimD · Mar 13, 2018

There's an alternate history where it's Tom Yawkey and not Lou Perini who moves him baseball team out of Boston in search of greener pastures. Perini sees a healthy bump in Braves attendance as former Sox fans flock to the city's remaining MLB franchise, and the adoption of the Braves as Boston's team is solidified with the team's 1957 world championship. Being a construction magnate and flush with this new good fortune, and sensing an opening as the fledgling Boston Patriots of the American Football League begin play, Perini opens a modern new stadium at the site of the old B&M railroad yards in Somerville in the early 1960's, joining Washington D.C. as the first cities in the United States to feature multipurpose venues to host both baseball and football teams.

The arc of this stadium's history follows that of other multipurpose stadiums in the U.S. and by the 1990's ownership of both the Sox and Patriots agitate for new separate venues. With the Patriots threatening to move to another locale, the city of Boston and the commonwealth pave the way for new side-by-side stadiums on the South Boston waterfront.

Meanwhile, pedestrians and the occasional tourist pass by a plaque in front of a condominium tower on Brookline Ave. just outside of Kenmore Square commemorating the long-ago time when Boston was host to an American League baseball team.

glasspusher · Mar 13, 2018

Al Zarilla said:
Or he might have been somewhat ignored like Bill Russell and his great Celtics teams, who rarely sold out the Garden while the average Bruins were outdrawing them. If you want to go Boston is more of a hockey town, well, the Bird Celtics sold out all the time. Put Russell next to Bird (and McHale and Ainge, Walton) and you can immediately see why, Boston.

Good point. I remember reading long ago that Russell loved his teammates and Auerbach, but didn't have any affection for Boston. I was puzzled, but this white boy growing up in NJ didn't know any of the racism backstory of Boston.

glasspusher · Mar 13, 2018

I could certainly see Atlanta and Tom Yawkey as a better fit than Boston and Yawkey.

Al Zarilla · Mar 13, 2018

glasspusher said:
Good point. I remember reading long ago that Russell loved his teammates and Auerbach, but didn't have any affection for Boston. I was puzzled, but this white boy growing up in NJ didn't know any of the racism backstory of Boston.

This white boy (well, Italian, close enough?

) from New Hampshire didn’t know any better either. Russell suffered a horrendous insult once when someone broke into his house in Reading or North Reading and crapped on his bed.

Humphrey · Mar 13, 2018

Except the South was not on the radar screen of MLB when the Braves moved out of Boston.
I can only find two years starting in 1934 where the Braves outdrew the Sox, in the late 40s; and the difference was very close.
Then in 1950, attendance fell off a cliff for Perini. Wonder why? They were only two years removed from winning a pennant. Braves Field might have been showing its age but so was the Fenway of the time.

glasspusher · Mar 13, 2018

Al Zarilla said:
This white boy (well, Italian, close enough?) from New Hampshire didn’t know any better either. Russell suffered a horrendous insult once when someone broke into his house in Reading or North Reading and crapped on his bed.

Wow. Did not know. I take it the people who broke in knew it was his place? That sucks.

I'm not WASP, but on the other hand, when Putin annexes Oakland, it'll probably be to protect ethnic Russians like me.

shaggydog2000 · Mar 13, 2018

Al Zarilla said:
Or he might have been somewhat ignored like Bill Russell and his great Celtics teams, who rarely sold out the Garden while the average Bruins were outdrawing them. If you want to go Boston is more of a hockey town, well, the Bird Celtics sold out all the time. Put Russell next to Bird (and McHale and Ainge, Walton) and you can immediately see why, Boston.

It's not exactly a fair comparison. The NHL was 30-40 years old at that time and well established. The NBA was only 10-20 years old and having a hard time in many markets. Just to pick one year as an example, in 1962 the NBA averaged about 5,000 people a game league wide. The Celtics were in the top tier with the Knicks and Lakers, who all drew close to 9,000 people a game. So they were well supported for an NBA team of the time. It was just a young league with less interest in general. The Celtics of the 80's were a much bigger deal, but so was the NBA in the 80's everywhere. That was when popularity soared. League wide attendance went from about 10k people a game in the 70's to ~15k in the late 80's. Games were on national TV, and they were live instead of tape delay. It's disingenuous to blame attendance in the two periods on race. Now if you want to make the argument that Larry Bird being white, and Magic Johnson being black created a racial element that allowed the game to be marketed to both demographics simultaneously, while also setting up a rivalry that re-enforced racial division, we can have that discussion and it could be interesting.

Also, at the time the Bruins were way outdrawing the Celtics, to keep 1962 as an example (smack in the middle of the Russell run), the Bruins were last in the NHL in attendance, with only ~11k per game, well shy of the 14k per game the top teams in the NHL were drawing. The Orr era didn't start until the Russell era was almost over. Even in 1970 when they won the cup, the team was in the middle of the league in attendance, and that was only because new expansion teams had been added. And the limited size of the old Boston Garden didn't help. So they were lesser draws in a more popular sport while the Celtics were one of the best draws in a less popular one. It's not a fair comparison either.

Braves or Red Sox?

Braves or Red Sox

Braves

Red Sox

has fancy plans, and pants to match

Moderator

New Member

Experiencing Furry Panic

has fancy plans, and pants to match

polka king

PN23's replacement

Member

Eli apologist

Moderator

has fancy plans, and pants to match

Bouncing with Anger

The North remembers

holden

Malt Liquor Picker

Member

Member

has fancy plans, and pants to match

Member

holden

has an efficient neck

Member

Member

New Member

Member

Malt Liquor Picker

Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

The North remembers

Well-Known Member

The North remembers

Urological Expert

The North remembers

shazowies

Will outlive SeanBerry

Well-Known Member

New Member

Member

has fancy plans, and pants to match

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member