I’d like to think that Calcaterra is right about this, but alas, I think it’s more hopeful thinking than anything else:
Loria, both with the way the stadium deal went down in Miami, and now with this cynical, soul-killing trade, has given anti-ballpark advocates a ton of ammunition. He has likewise rendered the old “we need a ballpark to be competitive, just wait until we have one!” pitch of team owners even more obviously hollow than it ever was. Which is great if, like me, you oppose public stadium projects, but really has to tick off those who want one of their own.
I’m opposed to any and all uses of public money to build stadiums for professional baseball teams unless a) they’re enacted by a popular referendum (and even then, I don’t actively support it, I just don’t so much care if the taxpayers of a locality decide that they really want to spend their money on a stadium) and b) they’re operated as profit generating enterprises for the local government(s) that put up the money, but I have no expectation that what happened in Miami will make any difference anywhere else. So far as broad public opinion goes, I suspect that it will merely harden the opinions of those already opposed, while doing little to change anyone else’s thoughts, and where specific cases are concerned, you’ll mostly see them get treated as their own unique examples. The Rays and A’s, in particular, probably have a lot more goodwill built up than the Marlins did, thanks to a history of winning with low payrolls. Heck, in each of the last two seasons, respectively, they’ve supposedly suffered crippling losses due to cost cutting, and in the immediately following season they made the playoffs with 90+ wins. That’s a far cry from the track record of Loria’s Marlins.