MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2038267997 · doi:10.1353/nin.2014.0008

New York, New York: A Financial History of Two Baseball Teams

2014· article· en· W2038267997 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael Haupert

Notice bibliographique

RevueNine · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueSports Analytics and Performance
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLeagueChampionVictoryFranchiseLiberian dollarValue (mathematics)SuperstarEconomic historyHistoryGloryManagementPolitical scienceEconomicsBusinessFinanceLawMarketingArt historyMathematicsPolitics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

New York, New YorkA Financial History of Two Baseball Teams Michael Haupert (bio) In 2012, the New York Mets turned fifty. In March of that year, Forbes magazine published their annual valuations of Major League Baseball (mlb) franchises. They estimated the New York Mets to be worth $719 million and the Yankees $1.85 billion. The value of the Yankees franchise is second only to that of the Dallas Cowboys ($2.1 billion) among North American team sports franchises.1 In 2011, the Yankees, boasting a roster studded with All-Stars earning a collective $210 million, won the American League Eastern Division title with a record of 97–65. The Mets, meanwhile, finished in fourth place, twenty-five games behind the Phillies. The billion-dollar difference in franchise value between the teams is the greatest it has ever been in the fifty-year existence of the Mets. This is a story about the value of these two franchises. How do they compare over time, and why do they differ by so much? Why do two teams, both located in the biggest baseball market in the country, seem to have experienced such different fates? the mets and yankees in new york On April 11, 1962, the New York Mets made their inauspicious debut, losing to the St. Louis Cardinals, 11–4. Twelve days later, after an 0–9 start, they earned their first victory. Meanwhile, across town the defending World Series champion Yankees opened the season with a victory. The Mets went on to one of the worst seasons in mlb history in 1962, while the Yankees went on to win another World Series title.2 The history of the New York Mets really begins with the departure of the Giants and Dodgers after the 1957 season. The void left by the transfer of these two nl squads to California begged to be filled. In fact, it was almost filled by another league altogether—the Continental League. The Mets and the Houston [End Page 68] Astros were expansion franchises awarded in an effort to thwart the realization of that league. The early Mets were a reflection of the crosstown Yankees, in no small part due to the hiring of disgruntled former Yankee general manager George Weiss as club president. Weiss’s hiring was a result of the reluctance of principal owner Joan Payson to meet the demands of first choice Branch Rickey. Ironically, Rickey was the mastermind behind the Continental League that spawned the Mets. Other Yankee personnel to join the Mets included Johnny Murphy, Gil McDougald, Whitey Herzog, and the coup de grace, manager Casey Stengel, the man who came to personify the early Mets.3 As an expansion franchise, the Mets were certain not to challenge the defending National League champion Cincinnati Reds, so they had to attract fans in some other way. The hiring of the eccentric Stengel was one such move. The Mets stocked their early roster with recognizable names as another way to draw fans to the park. They had aging stars Gil Hodges, Richie Ashburn, Gus Bell, and Gene Woodling, as well as former Brooklyn favorites Charlie Neal, Don Zimmer, Roger Craig, and Clem Labine. Unfortunately, they had to play their first two seasons in the crumbling Polo Grounds, until Shea Stadium could be completed in time for the 1964 season. The 1962 Mets are legendary for their incompetence. They set an mlb record for losses, with a 40–120 record, and en route endured performances from legendary players such as Rod Kanehl, who could play every position but none of them well, and catcher Choo Choo Coleman, whose main skill was chasing passed balls. Shortstop Elio Chacon’s lack of English extended to “I’ve got it,” resulting in frequent collisions with other players. And then there was Marv Throneberry, the first baseman whose fielding and base-running faux pas became the most enduring emblem of the early Mets.4 The Mets lost more than one hundred games in five of their first six seasons. Despite this level of futility, however, attendance at Mets games rose dramatically beginning in 1964, when they abandoned the Polo Grounds and started playing at Shea Stadium. In...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,191
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,381

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0050,001
Communication savante0,0060,004
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,006
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0530,006

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,036
Tête enseignante GPT0,202
Écart entre enseignants0,167 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNineMême sujetSports Analytics and PerformanceTravaux en français237 207