For the A’s, the story always is the ballpark they lack

So, how’s that new A’s ballpark coming along? You know, at Howard Terminal. Or is Howard Cosell?  It’s supposed to be ready by 2029. In Las Vegas, if not in Oakland.

They used to call San Francisco “the city that knows how,” but that was long ago before the homeless were camping out in the parks. Oakland might be described as the city that knows how to lose sports franchises. No, that’s not quite accurate.

The Warriors left because the team owner wanted the prestige of a San Francisco location — yes, even with dirty streets it has charm. The Raiders left because they wanted a town with money. And the A’s will be leaving because, as you’ve noted, from the bickering and pettiness, there’s no way a new stadium ever will be constructed in Oakland.

I feel sorry for the A’s. The baseball they play, and through the season it has ranked among the game’s best, invariably becomes less important than the other factors — from the time of Charles Finley to this very moment.

Instead of dwelling on Matt Olson, who will be in the All-Star Game home run contest, or Sean Manaea or Chris Bassitt, we’re always writing about the small payroll and the large financial problems. About the disappointing attendance and the generally clueless way the city treats the A’s and their fans.

We know the reality. As in the rest of the Bay Area, citizens who adhere to the NIMBY philosophy — as re-emphasized when, goodness gracious, the A’s suggested a stadium on the property of Merritt College, you’d have thought the team wanted to dam up the Oakland Estuary.

So, then the move was the harbor, the docks, Howard Terminal, functional stadium that seemed to fit in perfectly. Sorry, ship owners contend that stadium lights will affect the fish — just joking, I think.

Of late, an ad posted on the web page of the Oakland Times says the ballpark will cost Oakland taxpayers millions.

As you know, it all comes down to money. The A’s have paddled forward through the years with rosters of players who kept winning until those players became unaffordable — at least for the A‘s, if not other teams.

Billy Beane, the A’s GM for years, never whined about the payroll differential, although after one playoff loss some 20 years ago he was heard to sigh, “Another $50,000, we win that game.”

It’s a business, baseball, and players deserve what they are able to earn. As the A’s were outbid by other teams, Oakland management would tell us as soon as the new ballpark was built it could compete for its stars.

But the beat — and beatings — will go on. That ballpark is more myth than possibility. A’s president Dave Kaval tweeted, offhandedly we’re told, about the team shifting to Vegas. Hey, the Raiders did it.

The A’s were beaten 9-6 on Tuesday night by the Houston Astros, the team with the big bats and big bucks. A club can get by only so long on new kids and overachievers. Eventually, class and star power take control, as the Dodgers did in the World Series against Tampa Bay last year.

It is hardly surprising that the A’s current home, their home since they came to Oakland from Kansas City in 1968, is a negative.

The holiday series this past weekend against the Red Sox, the so-called “Reopening” without Covid-19 restrictions for the first time in a season and a half, drew only 61,000 for three games.

As we’ve been told repetitively, and correctly, the A’s need another ballpark. That it might be located far away from Oakland is the hard truth.