The Question That Needs an Answer IF John Fisher Decides to Sell

A few days ago, the San Francisco Chronicle ran a column from Scott Ostler, detailing some of the potential pitfalls for the A's plans to build in Las Vegas, even with groundbreaking expected some time next month.

It's a good piece with some solid logic, and you should totally check it out.

But there is one question that goes unanswered whenever says "Sell the team!" That question revolves around the circumstances of a potential sale. If the league is fed up with Fisher over-promising and under-delivering, then could they make him finally sell? It would be easy for Fisher to pull out of the Vegas project, claiming economic uncertainty and looming tariffs.

That route would allow him to say he made a real effort, but things changed. Same thing happened in Oakland when Covid slowed things down, so it's not an unfamiliar tactic. It would also give him a nice payday, and he'd increase his net worth, instead of using around half of it to build a ballpark.

If the League is to quietly force him out, then they could also have a decent amount of say in what happens with the direction of the A's. Assuming that all bids for ownership are similar, the league could have Fisher go with one of two paths: Las Vegas, or back to Oakland.

So what would the league decide? It's impossible to tell, because both sides of the argument have compelling cases.

For Vegas, they'd be getting into that market as soon as possible and would have removed Fisher from the equation, which would likely see an increase in public interest. They could also switch to a different site that more locals would be amenable to.

More or less sticking with the plan would also keep people from asking why they went along with Fisher's vision for so long only to pull the plug and pivot.

For Oakland, the fans have been vocal in saying that they'd come back if Fisher sold the club. Many A's fans have dreamed of Golden State Warriors owner Joe Lacob owning their team too, and if that came to fruition, there would be a huge surge in ticket and merchandise sales.

Lacob would likely also be willing to go the highest on his bid, which MLB would be happy with, as it would increase all team's valuations.

By returning the A's to Oakland, MLB could also wait to award an expansion club to Las Vegas, which is arguably the path that would have the most success in that market. The NHL's Golden Knights and WNBA's Aces have had success because they are home grown and consistently in championship contention. If the A's were to end up in Vegas, they'd be coming with a lot of baggage.

On the other hand, there have been owners that have complained about the Los Angeles Dodgers' spending in recent years, and Lacob would be replacing one of the more frugal owners with one that is more likely to spend competitively. He may not exactly be the guy that the other owners would want on that front, but maybe they'd overlook it if their team was suddenly worth more.

The question more or less is who would be in charge of making the decision on which path the A's would go? The way Reggie Jackson tells it, he had a group with a higher offer ready to buy the A's in the early 2000's, but MLB Commissioner Bud Selig awarded the A's to Fisher and his buddy from college, Lew Wolff.

The League can certainly have an impact on the decision-making process, but how they would end up viewing the situation is an unknown.