2020 schedule is out

[yarnivek1972]

 

https://www.mlb.com/twins/schedule/2020-03/list

 

Sort of. Days and teams. Most of the starting times TBD. Not sure if that’s a new time zone they are experimenting with or what.

[rkevin]

I have stated to a good and knowledgeable baseball friend of mine, the idea MLB set the beginning games of the season in most of the warm weather parks and dome teams (only a few left, I know). Compensation of the schedule could be made for games mid- and late-season to even things out. I think the players would like it, fans too...and fewer cold\rainy games at the start would be better for the club's pocket books. Just a thought.

 

Edit: The "beginning games of the season" I meant the first 2-3 weeks, maybe 4 weeks.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Seattle has a roof.

 

I'm not sure what lesson you want MLB to learn. There's no way to make this schedule if they can't open in any climate as "cold" as Oakland. They can't open in the same handful of cities every single year. And no one really wants the postseason to stretch into November anymore, which is why they're doing March starts.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I have stated to a good and knowledgeable baseball friend of mine, the idea MLB set the beginning games of the season in most of the warm weather parks and dome teams (only a few left, I know). Compensation of the schedule could be made for games mid- and late-season to even things out. I think the players would like it, fans too...and fewer cold\rainy games at the start would be better for the club's pocket books. Just a thought.

 

Edit: The "beginning games of the season" I meant the first 2-3 weeks, maybe 4 weeks.

No team wants to open with 2-3-4 weeks on the road, not for one single year, much less every year.

 

And by the time you're opening with 1-2 weeks on the road, it really doesn't make a difference. Your chance of cold and snow in Minneapolis isn't meaningfully different between March 28th or April 5th or even April 12th. We've had snow-outs around April 15-16 before too.

[yarnivek1972]

I guess I’m not sure what happened to the schedule in a general sense.

 

From April 1 to September 30 there are 183 days. They can’t get 162 games in with only 21 off days? Okay, 18 with the AS break.

 

As it is, they are playing 162 games in 189 days. They shouldn’t need that many off days.

 

It wasn’t that long ago that the season started in April and ended in September. That’s still 3 off days per month in addition to the AS break. With an extra player, that shouldn’t be that difficult. They shouldn’t need a week of games in March ANYWHERE.

[Puckett34]

Looks like 162-0 to me

[twinsnorth49]

Too many games. It will never happen but the schedule needs to be shortened. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I guess I’m not sure what happened to the schedule in a general sense.

From April 1 to September 30 there are 183 days. They can’t get 162 games in with only 21 off days? Okay, 18 with the AS break.

As it is, they are playing 162 games in 189 days. They shouldn’t need that many off days.

It wasn’t that long ago that the season started in April and ended in September. That’s still 3 off days per month in addition to the AS break. With an extra player, that shouldn’t be that difficult. They shouldn’t need a week of games in March ANYWHERE.

The players wanted the extra off days -- so they were agreed to, and now mandated by, the collective bargaining agreement in 2016. I guess ownership could have resisted that, but I don't think they care, as long as they get the postseason completed before November.

 

Frankly, ownership might prefer the current set up -- they don't lose that much at the gate by starting a week earlier, and it gives them a bit more flexibility to postpone early season games if necessary.

[yarnivek1972]

MLB attendance has been steadily declining for over a decade. Coincidentally (or not), MLB has been pushing the start of the schedule earlier.

 

So, the owners are definitely losing at the gate. Whether or not March games are the reason is uncertain. But I would suspect most people would rather go to the ballpark in July or August than March.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Too many games. It will never happen but the schedule needs to be shortened. 

That would be interesting.

 

It would have needed to happen in the 1980s at the latest, though, before the explosion in TV contracts and suite/premium ticket revenue.

[Vanimal46]

Looks like 162-0 to me

Same... Can't find a loss on the schedule.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

MLB attendance has been steadily declining for over a decade. Coincidentally (or not), MLB has been pushing the start of the schedule earlier.

So, the owners are definitely losing at the gate. Whether or not March games are the reason is uncertain. But I would suspect most people would rather go to the ballpark in July or August than March.

I'd guess the primary tangible reason behind any attendance decline is the reduced frequency of new ballpark openings. Those provide a huge boost. From 1989-2012, MLB opened 24 new parks -- an average of 1 per season. Now, the Braves have the only new park in the last 7 seasons. The "new ballpark" shine has worn off in many places around the league.

 

And even if any of the decline could possibly be attributed to weather, that would predominantly affect walk-up sales in the regular seating areas -- the least profitable/reliable ones. Season tickets and suites would be largely unaffected.

[yarnivek1972]

People that don’t go to games for which they have tickets don’t buy beer and brats either.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

People that don’t go to games for which they have tickets don’t buy beer and brats either.

Sure, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

 

And you already can see how stadiums deal with this. Many Target Field concessions are closed in the early weeks of the season, anticipating lower demand.

 

But teams have to split a significant chunk of concession revenue with their food vendor company too.

 

The fact remains that the biggest and most reliable/stable sources of team revenue are largely unaffected by an extra week of games in March: TV revenue, suite revenue, season/premium tickets. As much as we'd prefer to see teams starting later, there just isn't much of a financial incentive for teams to pursue that anymore.

[yarnivek1972]

Sure, and I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

 

And you already can see how stadiums deal with this. Many Target Field concessions are closed in the early weeks of the season, anticipating lower demand.

 

But teams have to split a significant chunk of concession revenue with their food vendor company too.

 

The fact remains that the biggest and most reliable/stable sources of team revenue are largely unaffected by an extra week of games in March: TV revenue, suite revenue, season/premium tickets. As much as we'd prefer to see teams starting later, there just isn't much of a financial incentive for teams to pursue that anymore.

Last weekend of March is usually the final four. That HAS to impact ratings.

 

And, while streaming services have made the “network schedules” nearly obsolete, some people still watch shows when they originally air.

[Yawn Gardenhose]

Does anyone else think that the heavily unbalanced schedule needs to end? I've thought this for years, and especially since 2013 when the current all-year-interleague locked things into place as they are now. Namely, that you have 6 series against your 4 divisional foes, 2 series against all other league members, and 20 interleague games. 

 

I like the idea of playing more games in-division than any other, but not to the extreme that is currently in place. I'd play 13 games versus each division foe (52 games) 9 games versus other league members (90 games), and 20 interleague games. You'd have some uneven home/road splits in the non-divisional games, but it's more sensible, and you still have an imbalance of games versus divisional rivals. So not only will the schedule determine legit division champions, it would do a better job at determining wild cards as it does now. Plus you'd be able to see non-divisional foes more often; I think lots of fans would prefer a second Yankee series rather than a third Tigers or Royals series (even though the Yankee series probably wouldn't go so well for the Twins!). 

 

Just throwing it out there.

[SpicyGarvSauce]

Talk about a brutal schedule to figure out road trips, etc.

 

Why does the MLB and all who handle the scheduling continue to insist on putting the Minnesota/Milwaukee series during the middle of the week? Also, @ Dodger Stadium in April and @ San Diego in September? Come on.

 

Anyone know when we can expect the spring training schedule to be out for 2020?

[Doomtints]

The Twins could have a similar year next year -- soft early schedule, soft late schedule.

[jkcarew]

 

That would be interesting.

 

It would have needed to happen in the 1980s at the latest, though, before the explosion in TV contracts and suite/premium ticket revenue.

Agree. Several reasons why it would make sense to go back to 154 games. And one big reason why it won't happen for the foreseeable future.

[jkcarew]

 

Does anyone else think that the heavily unbalanced schedule needs to end?

I'll feel stronger about this at some future theoretical point where the unbalanced schedule doesn't play to an extreme advantage for the Twins .

[Otto von Ballpark]

Why does the MLB and all who handle the scheduling continue to insist on putting the Minnesota/Milwaukee series during the middle of the week?

Probably to boost midweek attendance. Weekend games generally do well enough on their own, regardless of opponent.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Last weekend of March is usually the final four. That HAS to impact ratings.

 

First weekend of April, usually. That's why the Twins requested to open at home in March this year.

 

And that's only Saturday night and Monday night. Might affect a few Saturday games, but I suspect most will be day games. MLB season game 2 attendance/viewership probably sees a substantial drop from the opener anyway.

[notoriousgod71]

 

Same... Can't find a loss on the schedule.

 

Especially if they bring back the current pitching staff.

[Shaitan]

 

Does anyone else think that the heavily unbalanced schedule needs to end? I've thought this for years, and especially since 2013 when the current all-year-interleague locked things into place as they are now. Namely, that you have 6 series against your 4 divisional foes, 2 series against all other league members, and 20 interleague games. 

 

I like the idea of playing more games in-division than any other, but not to the extreme that is currently in place. I'd play 13 games versus each division foe (52 games) 9 games versus other league members (90 games), and 20 interleague games. You'd have some uneven home/road splits in the non-divisional games, but it's more sensible, and you still have an imbalance of games versus divisional rivals. So not only will the schedule determine legit division champions, it would do a better job at determining wild cards as it does now. Plus you'd be able to see non-divisional foes more often; I think lots of fans would prefer a second Yankee series rather than a third Tigers or Royals series (even though the Yankee series probably wouldn't go so well for the Twins!). 

 

Just throwing it out there.

I'd love to go back to the '90s balanced schedule without interleague play, other than finding a way for the rivalry games.

 

I'd also love to see a 154 game schedule. Along with expanded rosters, it would allow for the same amount of time off (perhaps more, with a 26-27 roster) and postseason wouldn't be so cold. I worry that if the Twins do make it, the Latin American players won't be able to hit through their snowsuits.

[Shaitan]

 

Agree. Several reasons why it would make sense to go back to 154 games. And one big reason why it won't happen for the foreseeable future.

If they added 2 more teams they could justify fewer games, I bet.

 

But I'm not in support of expansion. I think the pitching quality is already bad enough (besides some economic factors). But it might appeals tv contracts, ticket holders, and the players' union.

 

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

No team wants to open with 2-3-4 weeks on the road, not for one single year, much less every year.

 

And by the time you're opening with 1-2 weeks on the road, it really doesn't make a difference. Your chance of cold and snow in Minneapolis isn't meaningfully different between March 28th or April 5th or even April 12th. We've had snow-outs around April 15-16 before too.

Actually, players are more fresh in the spring... I'd have no problems with my team doing a bunch of road games to start... 

 

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I see that as an advantage to the Twins if their time in MN is somewhat limited in March/April. It comes back to benefit later in the year. Obviously they will still play home games during that time, but minimizing that to an extent is probably better than seeing games played in freezing weather or postponing games due to snow. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Actually, players are more fresh in the spring... I'd have no problems with my team doing a bunch of road games to start... 

 

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I see that as an advantage to the Twins if their time in MN is somewhat limited in March/April. It comes back to benefit later in the year. Obviously they will still play home games during that time, but minimizing that to an extent is probably better than seeing games played in freezing weather or postponing games due to snow. 

Oh, it could be an advantage to the Twins and other cold weather teams. But that would be another reason why other teams wouldn't want to do it. Warm weather teams don't want an outsized share of April home dates every year, because they don't draw as well as summer dates.

 

But home field advantage is a real thing, and there's a competitive disadvantage to opening a series or a season with too many road games.

 

(And on the flip side, warm weather teams would probably be concerned about massive road trips in September too, when they are worn down and trying to compete for postseason spots.)

[Mr. Brooks]

Oh, it could be an advantage to the Twins and other cold weather teams. But that would be another reason why other teams wouldn't want to do it. Warm weather teams don't want an outsized share of April home dates every year, because they don't draw as well as summer dates.

 

But home field advantage is a real thing, and there's a competitive disadvantage to opening a series or a season with too many road games.

 

(And on the flip side, warm weather teams would probably be concerned about massive road trips in September too, when they are worn down and trying to compete for postseason spots.)

Competitively, each team plays 81 at home and 81 on the road.

There is no competitive advantage to playing more home early or late.

 

Your other point is the main reason. Warmer weather owners aren't going to give away summer games for games when school is still in session.

[Riverbrian]

The Tigers are on the schedule again.

 

Every year it seems.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Competitively, each team plays 81 at home and 81 on the road.

There is no competitive advantage to playing more home early or late.

 

But in the playoffs, teams with home field advantage get home games first for a reason.

 

If you are talking about spending the entire first month of a six month season completely at home or on the road, like some in this thread have suggested, I think it could have a competitive impact on the season. As an example, a team with more home games early can "bank" more wins and put themselves in a better position at the trade deadline.

 

But yeah, there are many reasons why this will never happen, so I won't quibble with how one wants to rank them.