Report: Mike Trout as recognizable to americans as Kenneth Faried

[apalisoc_9]

https://sports.yahoo.com/report-mike-trout-recognizable-americans-201623491.html


https://media1.tenor.com/images/2183390c33417d017eaed6a53d80fb64/tenor.gif?itemid=4790020

[HarlemHeat37]

Damn, that's actually surprising:lol

[midnightpulp]

This is why MLB>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>today's NBA. Not star driven, marketed around teams first, and the fact the MLB is more popular than the NBA illustrates their marketing strategy is fine. You won't see soap opera horseshit (the Decision, Uncle Dennis, Kevin Durant, etc, etc) regarding players in the MLB like you do in the NBA. Ratings confirm.


2018 MLB All Star game: 8.3 million

2018 NBA All Star game: 7.7 million

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/2914439/laughing-manny.gif?_ga=2.227899933.1256827422.1531980109-1346946086.1531980109

[lefty]

:lmao

NBA scrub >>>> beisbol star

[spursistan]

:lmao..

[TimDunkem]

Who is Mike Trout? Some sort of cartoon fish?

[140]

:lol damn..

[DAF86]

This is why MLB>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>today's NBA. Not star driven, marketed around teams first, and the fact the MLB is more popular than the NBA illustrates their marketing strategy is fine. You won't see soap opera horseshit (the Decision, Uncle Dennis, Kevin Durant, etc, etc) regarding players in the MLB like you do in the NBA. Ratings confirm.


2018 MLB All Star game: 8.3 million

2018 NBA All Star game: 7.7 million

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/2914439/laughing-manny.gif?_ga=2.227899933.1256827422.1531980109-1346946086.1531980109

Why choose the all-star game as indicative? :lol

Anyway, the MLB isn't more popular, or has more viewers than the NBA. Maybe in the US it has, but not worldwide.

[apalisoc_9]

8.7 million of people who were switching btween channels.

Baseball is like a 6hr game but the truth is no one ever watches every minute of a baseball game

[spurraider21]

:lmao all star game viewership

[BD24]

Who gives a fuck tbh.

Of course a 6’7 black dude with dreads is more regonizable than a pretty average looking white guy though :lol

[140]

:lmao all star game viewership

[HarlemHeat37]

Who gives a fuck tbh.

Of course a 6’7 black dude with dreads is more regonizable than a pretty average looking white guy though :lol

Physically, yes, but Mike Trout might be the greatest baseball player since Bonds..I'm a baseball fan, but I think it's strange that he can't seem to take off in the mainstream(he makes highlights and hits home runs, too, so it's not like his style is boring)

[midnightpulp]

8.7 million of people who were switching btween channels.

Baseball is like a 6hr game but the truth is no one ever watches every minute of a baseball game

You're still going with that despite the fact I have constantly told you that's not how ratings work?

[midnightpulp]

:lmao all star game viewership

World Series outdrew the NBA Finals last 2 years, despite the baseball post season having to go against the NFL. And yes, All Star game viewership is a good way to take a pulse here, since they're both heavily promoted national events.

[dabom]

Who the fuck is mike trout.:lol

[spurraider21]

World Series outdrew the NBA Finals last 2 years, despite the baseball post season having to go against the NFL. And yes, All Star game viewership is a good way to take a pulse here, since they're both heavily promoted national events.
last 2 years? i'm seeing an edge in 2016 which was a pretty big aberration for the MLB, but thats it

[cjw]

This is why MLB>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>today's NBA. Not star driven, marketed around teams first, and the fact the MLB is more popular than the NBA illustrates their marketing strategy is fine. You won't see soap opera horseshit (the Decision, Uncle Dennis, Kevin Durant, etc, etc) regarding players in the MLB like you do in the NBA. Ratings confirm.


2018 MLB All Star game: 8.3 million

2018 NBA All Star game: 7.7 million


Did you really just compare All Star ratings to prove your point? I sure hope you’re joking.

NBA Finals ratings have generally been above World Series ratings except for when the Cubs finally won it.

Wake me up when an NBA game that isn’t impacted by the Sacramento riots has under 5,000 people at it like some MLB games.

[apalisoc_9]

I dislike baseball but even I know who the best MLB player is. Trout is a stud. But him not being a household name shows how much baseball is failing.

Fuck Neymar is probably more popular very the wrog reasons.

[140]

Who the fuck is mike trout.:lol
Tbh :lol

[resistanze]

Who is Mike Trout? Some sort of cartoon fish?

:lol

[midnightpulp]

last 2 years? i'm seeing an edge in 2016 which was a pretty big aberration for the MLB, but thats it

Philo'ing?

NBA: 2018 ABC 10.4 (17.85M Viewers)

MLB: 2017 Fox Houston Astros 4, Los Angeles Dodgers 3 10.6/20 (18.705 M viewers)

And the comparison isn't apples to apples most the time. The World Series often has to go up against the NFL regular season. The NBA is driven by star power, and the biggest star in the game has been in the Finals for like a century straight. Prior to 2016, the World Series constantly featured small market/secondary teams. The Royals vs. Mets would be like the Bucks vs. the Clippers in the NBA Finals. I doubt that match up draws over 12 million on average (unless of course there was Lebron/Curry on one of the teams). Houston vs. Dodgers was a good litmus test matchup. One flashy big market team with some national appeal against a mid-market perennial loser that has zero national appeal. And it outdrew Lebron/Curry XV.

[spurraider21]

Philo'ing?

NBA: 2018 ABC 10.4 (17.85M Viewers)

MLB: 2017 Fox Houston Astros 4, Los Angeles Dodgers 3 10.6/20 (18.705 M viewers)

And the comparison isn't apples to apples most the time. The World Series often has to go up against the NFL regular season. The NBA is driven by star power, and the biggest star in the game has been in the Finals for like a century straight. Prior to 2016, the World Series constantly featured small market/secondary teams. The Royals vs. Mets would be like the Bucks vs. the Clippers in the NBA Finals. I doubt that match up draws over 12 million on average (unless of course there was Lebron/Curry on one of the teams). Houston vs. Dodgers was a good litmus test matchup. One flashy big market team with some national appeal against a mid-market perennial loser that has zero national appeal. And it outdrew Lebron/Curry XV.
:lmao compares 2017 world series to 2018 nba finals and says i'm philo-ing

2017 nba finals outpaced 2017 world series

[midnightpulp]

I dislike baseball but even I know who the best MLB player is. Trout is a stud. But him not being a household name shows how much baseball is failing.

Fuck Neymar is probably more popular very the wrog reasons.

Baseball isn't about star power. People watch teams and don't care what Mike Trout is posting on Instagram. Yeah, baseball is failing so much it outdrew the NBA Finals the last two years. I also think this study is bullshit. Trout has 2.6 million followers on twitter. Faried has 300 some thousand. Highest viewed youtube video of Mike Trout is 5.0 million. Highest of Faried is 800K.

[midnightpulp]

:lmao compares 2017 world series to 2018 nba finals and says i'm philo-ing

2017 nba finals outpaced 2017 world series

Yeah, you're Philo'ing. Do you realize the NBA starts in a previous year and then finishes the next? I'm going by the last two matchups we have on record. Anyhow, it depends on the matchup (the NBA is also subject to this. Let's see how a non-Lebron/Warriors Finals does?). If the Yankees (the Yankees are baseball's Lebron) make it and face a team like the Dodgers or Cubs, it'll stomp the 2018 NBA Finals.

[spurraider21]

ur cherry picking data points tbh... typical philo

[midnightpulp]

ur cherry picking data points tbh... typical philo

How is going by the last two Finals matchups in both leagues "cherry picking?" You know what is an actual cherry pick? Comparing a Lebron rated NBA Finals to the Royals vs. Giants. I want to see how a Pacers vs. Pelicans Finals does, but we'll never get that since the NBA is shit.

[Spurtacular]

Tbf, a lot of the respondents were probably confusing Fareied with eight other knappy dreadlocked nikkas. :lmao

[Chris Fall]

Physically, yes, but Mike Trout might be the greatest baseball player since Bonds..I'm a baseball fan, but I think it's strange that he can't seem to take off in the mainstream(he makes highlights and hits home runs, too, so it's not like his style is boring)

A few things about Trout. He plays for the Angels, who are a second class citizen team in LA and nationally. And since they’ve had no post season success since he’s been there, his exposure has been limited during the time of year more casual baseball fans pay attention. Playing for LA also puts many of his games on Pacific Coast time, which closes the doors to basically the entire East Coast viewership and much of the Midwest audience as well.

Now take those those factors into account and add to them the fact he’s not an endorsement whore. Other than Subway, I’m not sure what other products he endorses. For that matter, there aren’t a lot of MLB national endorsers in general. But I’d be curious what the Q score of a player like Bryce Harper is just to see if a big name guy on the East Coast and on a playoff team last couple years gives him more name recognition.

I think it matters. Someone like David Ortiz was extremely well known, even by the most casual of baseball fans. Big baseball market on the East Coast, post season success. And you saw him nationally in commercials.

I agree that there are few individual “commercial” names in baseball. Some of the best players in the league like Nolan Arenado, Paul Goldschmidt, Jose Ramirez are not household names at all. Non baseball fans know guys like Harper, Stanton, Judge, Kershaw. But it’s not many.

[apalisoc_9]

How is going by the last two Finals matchups in both leagues "cherry picking?" You know what is an actual cherry pick? Comparing a Lebron rated NBA Finals to the Royals vs. Giants. I want to see how a Pacers vs. Pelicans Finals does, but we'll never get that since the NBA is shit.

We using youtube videos now :lol

[HarlemHeat37]

A few things about Trout. He plays for the Angels, who are a second class citizen team in LA and nationally. And since they’ve had no post season success since he’s been there, his exposure has been limited during the time of year more casual baseball fans pay attention. Playing for LA also puts many of his games on Pacific Coast time, which closes the doors to basically the entire East Coast viewership and much of the Midwest audience as well.

Now take those those factors into account and add to them the fact he’s not an endorsement whore. Other than Subway, I’m not sure what other products he endorses. For that matter, there aren’t a lot of MLB national endorsers in general. But I’d be curious what the Q score of a player like Bryce Harper is just to see if a big name guy on the East Coast and on a playoff team last couple years gives him more name recognition.

I think it matters. Someone like David Ortiz was extremely well known, even by the most casual of baseball fans. Big baseball market on the East Coast, post season success. And you saw him nationally in commercials.

I agree that there are few individual “commercial” names in baseball. Some of the best players in the league like Nolan Arenado, Paul Goldschmidt, Jose Ramirez are not household names at all. Non baseball fans know guys like Harper, Stanton, Judge, Kershaw. But it’s not many.

I agree about the market, I'm sure Trout would be a much bigger star even in the same state if you moved him to the Dodgers..

However, baseball wasn't always dependent on the market for star power..I'm still a fan today, but I used to be a HUGE fan when I was younger..it's not just my nostalgia speaking, MLB had more national stars in the 90s and they weren't dependent on market(obviously it still helped, somebody like Jeter was aided tremendously by playing for the Yankees, considering how boring of a personality he was)..I'd argue that they had more recognizable stars in the 90s than both the NFL and NBA during that time IMO..

I wonder what changed that made it such a regional game nowadays..

[midnightpulp]

We using youtube videos now :lol

Using something called a "Q score" that doesn't even reveal its methodology. :lol

Ratings, views, attendance, merchandise sales, these are the stats that matter.

[midnightpulp]

I agree about the market, I'm sure Trout would be a much bigger star even in the same state if you moved him to the Dodgers..

However, baseball wasn't always dependent on the market for star power..I'm still a fan today, but I used to be a HUGE fan when I was younger..it's not just my nostalgia speaking, MLB had more national stars in the 90s and they weren't dependent on market(obviously it still helped, somebody like Jeter was aided tremendously by playing for the Yankees, considering how boring of a personality he was)..I'd argue that they had more recognizable stars in the 90s than both the NFL and NBA during that time IMO..

I wonder what changed that made it such a regional game nowadays..

The only star who really drove national conversation back then was Griffey Jr. The Bonds/Sosa/McGwire era came a bit later, and was quickly tainted by the PED controversy. It also could be a general shift in the MLB's marketing strategy that prioritizes the regional over the national, since the latter requires more casual and bandwagoners who likely won't be long term fans when whatever element that attracted them to the league (i.e. charismatic star, dramatic storyline, etc) goes away.

As we talked about before, I think the NBA marketing strategy considers too much of the short-term. Relying on 1 or 2 once-in-a-generation superstars who have equal parts talent and charisma to carry the league is risky. When Jordan retired, interest tanked, and sent the NBA into panic mode looking for a replacement. Kobe/Lakers really didn't fit the bill, and it wasn't until 2009 Lebron (Lebron really couldn't draw before. 2007 Finals ratings were abysmal) and the fall out from the Decision that the NBA finally found some semblance of Jordan level marketability they could push. Even though the MLB doesn't generate the conversation from insipid hot take shows, I think the league is in a better position moving forward than the NBA. MLB viewing typically wins their time slot in a region. The MLB team is often a bigger draw than the NBA in a region. I would venture to say there's more eyeballs on MLB content any given night than there is on NBA content during the respective regular seasons. Players retire, storylines end. Teams can't retire.

I would also say the MLB is more age agnostic, while the NBA is focused on attracting the 12-26 demographic. Again, risky. Tastes do and will change, and I find the way the NBA markets itself insultingly childish. When LaVar Ball's antics are dominating an NBA off-season, you know you've entered TMZ territory, but the "kids" love this shit, I guess. Then it was followed up with the Uncle Dennis/Kawhi nonsense. I mean, Kawhi became a household name more off the controversy of this circus than anything he ever did on court :lol

[midnightpulp]

Also, too HarlemHeat37, I think the lack of nationally loved individual stars in baseball has to do with the fact there's really no on-field accomplishment anymore that can create a "storyline." The most hallowed record in sports for a long time was the regular season home run record. McGwire obliterated it. The other big record was the all-time home run record. Bonds did that and then beat McGwire's record. Then the PED controversy happened. So now, even if a Judge, Stanton, etc makes a run at 73, people won't buy it as a legit, even if they're clean as a whistle. So that combined with the fact MLB players tend not to be attention whores poses a problem for nationwide marketability. Also, it makes more sense to market around a teams. Trout is going to get the same number of at-bats as a shitty player like Luis Valbuena. As I've explained, you don't watch baseball necessarily to see Trout or another individual player do his thing since they can't dominate the action.

That said, I think the route to creating baseball's next "face" will come through a two-way player like Ohtani. He was a sensation before he got hurt and was driving a good deal of national conversation, but he obviously lacks the marketability factor being Japanese and playing for the Angels. Watch out for Hunter Greene, called baseball's Lebron. 102 mph fastball and can hit. But he's getting lit up in the minors, so that might fizzle out.

[lefty]

Who the fuck is mike trout.:lol

Dude is a LEGEND

He is a plumber on Monday, an ice cream truck driver on Tuesday, a U.S post office employee on Wednesday, a grocery bagger on Thursday, an accountant on Friday and a Baskin Robbins employee on Saturday.
On Sunday he goes to church and watches football as he's eating hot dogs.
Lots and lots of hot dogs.

[apalisoc_9]

Also, too HarlemHeat37, I think the lack of nationally loved individual stars in baseball has to do with the fact there's really no on-field accomplishment anymore that can create a "storyline." The most hallowed record in sports for a long time was the regular season home run record. McGwire obliterated it. The other big record was the all-time home run record. Bonds did that and then beat McGwire's record. Then the PED controversy happened. So now, even if a Judge, Stanton, etc makes a run at 73, people won't buy it as a legit, even if they're clean as a whistle. So that combined with the fact MLB players tend not to be attention whores poses a problem for nationwide marketability. Also, it makes more sense to market around a teams. Trout is going to get the same number of at-bats as a shitty player like Luis Valbuena. As I've explained, you don't watch baseball necessarily to see Trout or another individual player do his thing since they can't dominate the action.

That said, I think the route to creating baseball's next "face" will come through a two-way player like Ohtani. He was a sensation before he got hurt and was driving a good deal of national conversation, but he obviously lacks the marketability factor being Japanese and playing for the Angels. Watch out for Hunter Greene, called baseball's Lebron. 102 mph fastball and can hit. But he's getting lit up in the minors, so that might fizzle out.

Meh.

I remeber when there was some slight buzz with darvish when he came in to the league and he never turned into a player that he was hyped up to be.

Mike trout is the greteast MLB player ive seen play. Just because ohtani cam pitch and hit, its never gonna amount to anything.

Fact is trout is a phenomenal player but he is still irrelevant

[midnightpulp]

Meh.

I remeber when there was some slight buzz with darvish when he came in to the league and he never turned into a player that he was hyped up to be.

Mike trout is the greteast MLB player ive seen play. Just because ohtani cam pitch and hit, its never gonna amount to anything.

Fact is trout is a phenomenal player but he is still irrelevant

If you have a player who can carry a 3.00ish era in the American league and hit for a .850 OPS, that'll amount to a shit load of wins, and it's noteworthy as a "storyline" (which idiotic modern sports fans love) because we haven't seen a great two-way baseball player in over 100 years. Ohtani might not be the guy from a marketability standpoint, but he's proving it can be done.

Trout is not irrelevant, but he's not a huge celebrity like NBA stars, which is the "issue" here. And I'm fine with that. It's disgusting how media follows around Lebron's every move and how he basically dictates the balance of power in the NBA since his individual impact is so great. No baseball player can shift the balance like that, and thus you won't get all this retarded media fawning over their every tweet and Instagram post. MLB players are replaceable, and they know it. Seasons hacking it out in minor league ball humbles your ass. If we had this Uncle Dennis/Kawhi drama on the Dodgers with Kershaw, fuck off and good riddance. There's a prospect that can likely fill your void. Meanwhile, Kawhi's leaving will set back the Spurs for decades since everything in basketball is centered around a star or two.

NBA has turned into TMZ with a ball involved.

[BD24]

Physically, yes, but Mike Trout might be the greatest baseball player since Bonds..I'm a baseball fan, but I think it's strange that he can't seem to take off in the mainstream(he makes highlights and hits home runs, too, so it's not like his style is boring)
That’s fair. The average joe can regoznize Bonds, Sosa, Mgguire. Given that was a golden age for baseball, but still kind of odd

[Stabula]

Baseball is fucking boring