Notes from the Ditch, March 6, 2007

March 6th, 2007 by SBG

coolhandluke.jpg1. Much has been made recently in the Twins blogging community about LENIII, Joe Christensen and Howard Sinker blogging about the Twins at startribune.com. As a Twins fan, I'm interested, of course, and I'm also enjoying those blogs. But, you may not know about another great blog that has been running for a while now at BP, known as Baseball Prospectus Unfiltered. It is free (no subscription) and the BP writers provide plenty of content about the site and baseball. Yesterday was no exception. Nate Silver writes about "pitching prospects" (there is no such thing, didn't you hear?) and posits that "keeping [young pitchers who are ready] down on the farm is not conservative — it’s a downright irresponsible way to run a ballclub." Chew on that when you are watching Ramon Ortiz or Sidney Ponson labor away in a Twins uniform. Also, you might want to read that and discuss. There's plenty to talk about.

2. The Timberwolves have started a new public relations campaign called the Blueprint for the Future. Glen Taylor has authored a letter to the fans. They've put together a multimedia presentation on the offense, defense, and player development among other topics. At the end of the presentation is a pricelist for season tickets for 2007-08. If you actually buy this dog and pony show, I want to remind you that subscriptions to the WGOM are due. Prices are going for just $49.99 for a full year.

3. The Twins won on Monday, their first win of the spring. Carlos Silva had a much better outing, allowing no runs and one hit with three strikeouts in three innings. However, Matt Garza had to leave with a stiff neck. Kevin Slowey pitched an inning, prompting the Devil Rays manager to say that Slowey's location was "spectacular".

4. How many ways can the NFL say "Fuck You" to everyone before the masses rise up and revolt against their substandard product? Now, the NFL is trying to trademark the phrase "The Big Game" to prevent businesses from advertising Super Bowl parties without using the phrase Super Bowl. Remember, they won't let churches show the game, citing an obscure Copyright proviso. Now, they want to lock up "The Big Game". This is a trademark application that should be vigorously opposed. It just goes to show how willing the NFL is to stomp on everyone. If they get exclusive rights to use "The Big Game", I would suggest people start calling it "The Big Football Game" or "The Biggest Game". As if the NFL thinks they can trademark every descriptive phrase that comes along. And the best part is that I'm sure somewhere Gregg Easterbrook is writing a column defending this action. Good God, I can't wait for first pitch.

5. I wanted to point out in the crush of new content here at the WGOM the Neil Young clip that I loaded for last night. It's pretty spectacular. Thanks to brianS for the link (I grabbed a different clip because the original one was giving me problems). Also, thanks to brianS for setting up a login for SacBee registration on articles that he posts from. The user name is sbgfan and the password is "fanofsbg". Please be responsible when reading from the site with that login.

6. Also thanks to AMR for his excellent post on mugshots. It looks like he's planning to post more -- let's hope he does!

SBG



This entry was posted by SBG on Tuesday, March 6th, 2007 at 12:00 pm and is filed under Notes from the Ditch. It is one of 2466 entries by the author. We are no longer accepting Letters to the Editor on this post.



Comments Feed31 Letters to the Editor

brianS replied on March 6, 2007 at 12:15:15 pm

Yah, I meant to comment on the "Big Game" thing. The "Big Game" has been the moniker for the Cal-Stanford football game for, oh, decades at least. You can bet that numerous, politically prominent Cal and Stanford alums will have something to say about this issue.

I have a hard time imagining how the NFL could possibly gain trademark rights to a phrase that is already well established in the common parlance as meaning something OTHER than the Super Bowl.

SBG replied on March 6, 2007 at 12:28:39 pm

Well, they would have less difficulty if the phrase wasn't used to describe a FOOTBALL GAME.

Even if the NFL succeeds in establishing a trademark, do they think that they can go around gobbling up every descriptive term in the book? How about Next Sunday's Football Game? Do they think they'll get that? I doubt it. It's a stoopid, stoopid exercise by a league drunk on its own power.

Jeff A replied on March 6, 2007 at 3:00:15 pm

This isn't a prediction, exactly, but I have to wonder if the NFL might not be heading for a fall. I'm not saying it will happen this year or next, but in history, there are a lot of companies that looked very strong, but ultimately collapsed because they became arrogant and stopped caring about their customers. I'm sure the bottom line is still strong now, but sometimes things turn around very quickly. Pro football won't completely go away, but nowhere is it written that the NFL always has to be the dominant professional sport.

Algonad replied on March 6, 2007 at 3:59:03 pm

Unfortunately, there are also examples of companies that are arrogant and don't care about their customers that seem to just keep going because of some type of monopoly (Microsoft, Ticketmaster, etc.). It will come back to bite them at some time, but it can take an awfully long time.

Isn't baseball just as guilty as football on a lot of these steps?
Moving to DirectTV
Suing (unsuccessfully) to try to get royalties for the use of baseball
statistics
Moving all playoff games to primetime to maximize advertising revenue and,
in the process, minimizing kids' interest in the sport.

It seems like there are plenty of examples in both sports of this arrogance.

ubelmann replied on March 6, 2007 at 5:01:20 pm

Moving all playoff games to primetime to maximize advertising revenue and,
in the process, minimizing kids’ interest in the sport.

Um, objection? All three Twins playoff games were decidedly day games, not anywhere near primetime on the East Coast or West Coast. (And it was an absolute nightmare for me, and in other recent Twins' playoff series, it's been very difficult for me to actually see OR hear the games live.)

This is a tough, tough issue, and revenue vs. kids certainly isn't the only thing at play here. As long as we live in a country with four time zones, someone, somewhere is getting screwed no matter when you schedule the game. It's just how it is.

It's also unclear to me exactly what kind of favor MLB is doing to kids if they wind up scheduling games during school hours, when students are presumably occupied with learning, just like most of their fanbase is occupied with work.

Algonad replied on March 6, 2007 at 5:19:45 pm

There are obviously times that kids can watch (3pm-9pm) and times where they can't. MLB puts their marquee games during primetime. I don't really see any exceptions to that. Maybe to us the Twins are a marquee game but not to most baseball fans. And once we get past the first round, there are very few (if any) day games.

When the most exciting part of a game is after midnight, how can you expect the next generation of fans to grow up enjoying baseball?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
ubelmann replied on March 6, 2007 at 6:09:45 pm

There are obviously times that kids can watch (3pm-9pm)...

Okay, let's start here. 3pm-9pm in which time zone? 3pm-9pm ET is 12pm-6pm PT, so you're cutting into school time for kids on the West Coast. 3pm-9pm PT is 6pm-12pm ET, so now you're too late for kids on the East Coast. Well, 6pm-9pm ET should be okay for kids everywhere, but scheduling, for instance, an Angels-Giants game at 3pm PT is a pretty big FU to the season ticket holders that have day jobs. Even if you can twist someone's arm to knock off work by 4:30, there's no guarantee traffic will actually cooperate for you to get to the game in a timely fashion, and the most dramatic part of the game might already have passed by the time you get there. And if you lose that customer, you're probably losing his kids, too.

When the most exciting part of a game is after midnight, how can you expect the next generation of fans to grow up enjoying baseball?

Here's a dirty secret: I don't remember watching the '91 WS at all. Not one pitch. I'm not even sure how much of it I really got to see. I'd say I turned out to be a rather devoted fan, nonetheless.

I do remember the highlights, and I do remember the important storylines, though, because it was the talk of the town. (And because it was back when TWiB was the best thing on television.)

When it comes to kids, baseball has a lot more to offer than a few innings of playoff baseball that may or may not involve their hometown team. The most important thing that got me hooked into baseball was playing it. If I hadn't ever played at any level, I highly doubt we would be having this conversation. The next most important thing, personally, was listening to the games on the radio in the summer. My family didn't have cable, and certainly not all games were televised back then, so listening on the radio was the way to keep up with the team. Listening on the way to my little league games, or on the way back, or on some random trip in the car, summer meant baseball on the radio.

Then there were the annual trips to the Dome. Living two hours from the Dome, I got to see the Twins once a year. It was a glorious treat (and as a kid, I had absolutely no qualms about indoor baseball) and I remember some of those trips quite fondly. I also can't remember who won or lost any of those games. I do remember Kirby Puckett hitting a ball to the RCF gap, hustling hard to first, then second, and then realizing that (could it be?) he was going to try for third! It was a bang-bang play at third, but Kirby had made it safely under the tag for a triple. There'd been a triple, one of the most exciting plays in baseball, by my favorite player on the team, and I was lucky enough to make it there that day. I was beside myself.

And the baseball cards! Oh, the baseball cards. Every summer as a kid, I'd save my allowance money to spend it on baseball cards and I spent hours organizing them, reorganizing them, talking about them with my friends, trading to make sure I got a full Twins' set, and even making trades to complete a full set a couple of times. If you could make baseball cards affordable for kids again, I think you'd do a lot more to get kids interested in baseball than changing the air time of a couple of games each year.

I loved baseball because baseball was fun. As a kid, I thought it was neat that the Twins won the World Series, but they could have swept in the most boring possible 4-game sweep you can envision, and I'd probably feel the same way about baseball. Late playoff games didn't ruin baseball for me, and they aren't going to ruin baseball for future generations.

[Also, your initial point was about whether or not a sport cared about its customers. Advertisers pay more for primetime because that's when people can watch TV. Putting games on when the most people can watch them sounds like a customer-friendly practice to me.]

 
spycake replied on March 6, 2007 at 6:52:29 pm

Here’s a dirty secret: I don’t remember watching the ‘91 WS at all. Not one pitch

I watched, but I went to bed before Kirby's HR in Game 6, and my dad made me go to bed after 9 innings of Game 7 (luckily I snuck a radio in with me). I didn't see the '87 WS at all, but I got hooked in the summer of 1990 thanks to baseball cards and radio broadcasts.

I think you make some great points. We'd all prefer if MLB approached some things differently, but drawing fewer kids as fans is largely beyond their control. There are just so many new entertainment and sporting options available today, baseball was bound to take a hit. (I would like to see cheap baseball cards again, though!)

 
Algonad replied on March 6, 2007 at 7:06:10 pm

I'm fully aware there are 4 time zones across the continental US. If we're really going to nitpick, let's not leave the Hawaiian time zone out of this!

But I'm tired of arguing. If you think having the most exciting moments in the baseball playoffs happen after eleven pm for about 2/3 of the population of the US is customer friendly, I guess I'm not going to convince you otherwise.

 
ubelmann replied on March 6, 2007 at 8:09:21 pm

If we’re really going to nitpick, let’s not leave the Hawaiian time zone out of this!

I hardly think it's nitpicking to point out that an area of the country with seven major league baseball teams is on a vastly different time zone than the one with the Yankees and the Sawx.

If you think having the most exciting moments in the baseball playoffs happen after eleven pm for about 2/3 of the population of the US is customer friendly, I guess I’m not going to convince you otherwise.

Game times for last year's World Series:
2:54
2:55
3:03
3:35
2:56

That gives us a grand total of 38 minutes of baseball past 11pm in the eastern time zone and zero minutes of baseball past 11pm in the central time zone if games start right at 8ET/7CT/5PT, which I would argue is the best compromise time for a nationwide sporting event on a weekday. Pitchers who stand around and take their sweet time to make the next pitch, and quantity of advertising in the playoffs are more of a problem than an 8pm ET start.

I get the impression that you've never tried following sports from the West Coast. I really had no idea how bad it would be until I moved out here, and if I had known beforehand, I might not have moved this far west. If someone stays up late to watch a baseball game, then he gets to make a choice between sleep and baseball. It's certainly an inconvenience, but it's a choice he can make. If a game is scheduled while he'm working, during the day, many times he simply can't watch that game. It's not an inconvenience, it's an impossibility.

So you have a choice: either 2/3 of your customers can stay up an extra hour or so to catch the special moments, or 1/3 of your customers can miss the special moments altogether. Like I said, someone gets screwed either way--you have to balance the number of customers versus how severely you're screwing them.

 
New Britain Bo replied on March 6, 2007 at 8:49:48 pm

Christ Stick. 'Wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie.' (I'm referring to the font size in the reply postings).

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Nick N. replied on March 6, 2007 at 12:23:40 pm

Is this blue design for the site permanent? My browser has a tough time with it... puts all the content at the bottom so I have to scroll all the way down.

SBG replied on March 6, 2007 at 12:29:15 pm

What's blue? I see red. Is anyone else seeing blue?

ubelmann replied on March 6, 2007 at 1:51:23 pm

I see dead people. I mean, I see red.

CarterHayes replied on March 6, 2007 at 4:01:58 pm

Better dead then Red, ubes.

ubelmann replied on March 6, 2007 at 4:50:10 pm

True. It's a good thing that I'm only seeing red.

 
 
 
 
SBG replied on March 6, 2007 at 3:36:39 pm

What browser are you using? I've used FF and MS IE6 and IE7 and all I'm seeing is red.

brianS replied on March 6, 2007 at 4:11:25 pm

I’ve used FF and MS IE6 and IE7 and all I’m seeing is red.

Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to the Dark Side.

 
Rhubarb_Runner replied on March 6, 2007 at 4:19:18 pm

Are we talking about the banner at the top? Or the light blue of the rest of the webpage?

 
Nick N. replied on March 6, 2007 at 4:46:30 pm

I'm using FireFox, and I've got the old light blue template. It is not very functional on this browser either.

SBG replied on March 6, 2007 at 4:49:18 pm

Try going to Tools and clearing your cache. That should turn it red again. If not, we're going to have to figure out why in the hell you are seeing the site different from everyone else.

Rhubarb_Runner replied on March 6, 2007 at 5:47:39 pm

I've only seen light blue for the last several days, cleared cache or not.

 
 
 
 
 
brianS replied on March 6, 2007 at 12:36:03 pm

umm. the water on the globe is blue.

 
bjhess replied on March 6, 2007 at 3:24:21 pm

Did you see Tampa Bay has a prospect called Evan Longoria

Rhubarb_Runner replied on March 6, 2007 at 3:31:05 pm

I saw that! Do you think his teammates call him "Eva"? Opponents? Fans? I think yes...

 
 
HVS replied on March 6, 2007 at 3:30:53 pm

Even if you take his arguments as givens, pitchers could still be prospects insofar as you may not know what they are capable of. Once you do, then it would be irresponsible to leave them in the farm system.

Regardless, I have no idea if that theory is true, but it is an interesting one.

SBG replied on March 6, 2007 at 3:35:40 pm

It's also important not to overwork young arms. I read that article with a little skepticism. If you've got a 21 year old kid, you almost certainly can't have him throw 220 innings, right? Then allowances need to be made on the major league pitching staff for a guy that simply is not ready to handle a full season's worth of pitching.

HVS replied on March 6, 2007 at 3:47:22 pm

True. What about starting them in the bullpen and then move them to the starting rotation later?

brianS replied on March 6, 2007 at 4:12:20 pm

Like, uh, Johan?

 
 
 
 
E-6 replied on March 6, 2007 at 7:59:51 pm

No Fun League, indeed. I quit watching the Vikes and any other NFL product two years ago. I figured life was too short to get worked up over a butch of demonstative, steroidal freaks banging helmets for 35 minutes--streched into a 3-hr telecast with inane commentary--every Sunday afternoon. Sure, I might glance at the screen if a game is on at a friend or family domicile, but those three hours are now "my time." (The best time to visit Home Depot is during a Vikes telecast.)

*SBG--love the Newman graphic for the 'Ditch.'

 
E-6 replied on March 6, 2007 at 8:04:52 pm

Hey, how concerned should we be about Garza's neck injury? I'm not ready for another groin kick like we got with the F-Bomb.

 

Sorry, the LTE form is closed at this time.

Feed

http://stickandballguy.com/blog / WGOM Headlines