When the Brooklyn Dodgers and New York Giants moved west following the 1957 season, it left a glaring hole in the largest city in America. The Mets joined the league in 1962 and — adorned with the colors of Dodger Blue and Giant Orange — were supposed to erase the memory of the two lost and widely loved City teams. San Francisco and Los Angeles undoubtedly deserved teams, but New York arguably didn’t deserve to lose one, let alone two.

This is obviously not the best time to consider expansion (amidst a season that may spell financial trouble for a dozen or more teams), but could a third team in New York — specifically one based in Brooklyn — survive today? All anecdotal evidence says yes. New York is certainly large enough to accommodate a third team, and it is also a market ripe with seemingly endless potential (e.g., sponsorship, television, radio).

If you were an owner of a struggling franchise — and the option was yours — which would you choose as your top destination to move your ballclub: Northern Virginia, Portland, Ore., Las Vegas, or New York?

Although a third franchise would have to compete with both the Yankees and Mets — and it should be noted that both franchises would strongly resist a third team (much like the San Francisco Giants’ claim of the South Bay) — the prospects for growth and revenue is still greater in New York than the other options. In fact, New York could thrive with a third team, bringing new rivalries and old alliances to the surface.

It may not happen, but a third team in New York should be an option for a struggling ballclub. Some cities and metropolitan areas are better-served with two teams rather than one (e.g., Chicago, Los Angeles, SF Bay Area; and Boston could join that list, too), but New York may be best served with three.