The market's been soft, ... and I think that's mostly a result of the new provisions in the collective bargaining agreement.

He's innovated baseball management. He's shown the way to exploit a big city market by spending heavily on players.

I don't think contraction is a viable option.

But in terms of the competitive balance, that's very problematic. It's not likely it's going to have any significant effect at all. We still have a highly significant correlation between payroll and performance. That's really all we're talking about.

In this case I think it's quite unlikely (the team will move). Seattle is a large market and growing more rapidly than many markets, and I don't think the NBA wants to have a sour relationship there.

I'm sure there will be thousands of new jobs. But the question is whether they subtract jobs from people working nearby.

They've just ignited the fan interest in St. Louis, and management has been smart enough to maintain that.

It will continue the cycle; I think it has to. It's positive to have serious corporations that have the business background to do that kind of work necessary to run teams today.

It's ludicrous that he's not in the Hall. He's one of the most important executives in the history of the game. He transformed the sport. If the Hall is going include both players and executives, it hurts its integrity for him to not be there.

It seems to me what necessarily has to happen is some concessions from both sides. Whether that is a victory for owners or victory for players, I'm not sure, ... Baseball and Billions.