A rant - Schedule

[Squirrel]

 

If only every problem was this easy to solve. The instructions for resolution require three words … Digital Video Recorder.  You can get one for $200 and it will last a decade or more. Problem resolved for $20/year.

 

Why would you make your schedule dependent upon broadcast times under any circumstance? East coast games are earlier than I want to sit down for the game. For that matter. 7:10 is too early. Why take 3 hours to watch a game when you can cut out commercials, pitching changes, mound visits or anything else you don’t care to see.

 

There are many things in the world worthy of a rant. This is definitely not one of them.

 

Yeah, but if you aren't watching the games as they happen, you can't participate in game threads!
 

[nicksaviking]

The day games have actually been really nice for me ever since my company asked me to work from home. 

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

This thought is expressed almost every April.

 

Here's the problem: the same thought applies to Boston, the Yankees, the Mets, Baltimore, Washington, Philadephia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, the Cubs, the White Sox, St. Louis, Kansas City, and Colorado. That's more than half the teams. They can't all open on the road. And even if you eliminate one of those teams to make it 15, it's unfair in more than one way to have all those teams play two weeks worth of road games to start the season every year.

 

St Louis, Kansas City, New York, Baltimore, Philly and DC all have average lows for April in the mid-to high 40's; not great, but not like the rest of the teams you list, so strike 7 teams off the "can't host list" right away.

 

The easiest way to do this is to take your 9 weather impacted teams (MIN, BOS, PIT, CLE, CIN, DET, CHC, CWS, COL), and give them one series at home during the first half of April, but make it on a weekend so day games aren't as much of an impediment.

 

Take your 7 borderline teams (STL, KC, NYY, NYM, BAL, PHI, WAS), and have them do 1-3 series at home in the first 2 weeks, with 1-2 on the weekend, and 2 gamers if possible, with an off day for both teams right after the end of the series.

 

The other 14 teams will host 3-4 series in the first 2 weeks, which will tend to skew to midweek a bit more.

 

This isn't that hard to figure out.

[chaderic20]

I assumed the daytime starts were just weather precautions. Starting at 1:00pm gives you a roughly 12-hour window to get a game in before having to call it a night, whereas starting at 7:00pm only gives you a 6-hour window.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

This isn't that hard to figure out.

The difference in average weather over 2 weeks doesn't mean much, in this context. Average high in Minneapolis is 50 on April 1, 57 on April 14 -- that's meaningful to climate scientists but not to a baseball league planning a schedule months in advance. The actual variability of day-to-day weather will wash out those average pretty easily. Snow and 42 in Minneapolis today April 19, below freezing overnight; meanwhile, it was in the 70's each day from April 3-7.

 

Add to that the reality that TV and season ticket sales are the biggest revenue sources for teams, and neither are particularly affected by weather. It's honestly not worth the effort to push a few games 2 weeks later.

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

The difference in average weather over 2 weeks doesn't mean much, in this context. Average high in Minneapolis is 50 on April 1, 57 on April 14 -- that's meaningful to climate scientists but not to a baseball league planning a schedule months in advance. The actual variability of day-to-day weather will wash out those average pretty easily. Snow and 42 in Minneapolis today April 19, below freezing overnight; meanwhile, it was in the 70's each day from April 3-7.

 

Add to that the reality that TV and season ticket sales are the biggest revenue sources for teams, and neither are particularly affected by weather. It's honestly not worth the effort to push a few games 2 weeks later.

 

Sure, weather is variable.  That's how you get 3 feet of snow on Halloween one year, but a high of 69 in Montevideo on January 24 in another.  The point however is--if someone forced you to place a bet on which day would have a warmer high temperature, April 1 or April 15, absent any other data, literally everyone would say April 15.  And yes, single game tickets are a drop in the bucket, but if you can optimize, why wouldn't you?  Further, if you're all but forced to play day games during the week in order to minimize the risk of cold temperatures, normal conditions will make that less optimal for TV/radio.  BSN has a vested interest in games being watched live, else people do go through the commercials, and that's not beneficial to them.  I have to imagine almost no one listens to recorded radio, so WCCO absolutely needs the live audience.  When kids are in school, and adults are by and large at work, weekday day games are harder for people to consume.  Tailoring a schedule to reduce the need for weekday day games is not going to drive massive revenue growth, but I don't see how it can't drive some.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The point however is--if someone forced you to place a bet on which day would have a warmer high temperature, April 1 or April 15, absent any other data, literally everyone would say April 15. 

That's a very different question than what the league faces.

 

 

Further, if you're all but forced to play day games during the week in order to minimize the risk of cold temperatures

The Twins are not "all but forced" to do this. They've never done it before that I can recall. I suspect the scheduling of the Red Sox series last week was a confluence of factors. Weather was not likely a motivator for the decision, but may have been a secondary factor that made the decision more palatable.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

BSN has a vested interest in games being watched live

I agree with this, which is why I pointed out upthread that BSN already had 3 Wild and Wolves broadcasts scheduled for evenings during the Twins - Red Sox series. Which probably made the decision to play baseball during the day a bit more palatable to them too. (Even though I doubt that this too was a primary factor driving the decision.)

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

That's a very different question than what the league faces.

 

 

The Twins are not "all but forced" to do this. They've never done it before that I can recall. I suspect the scheduling of the Red Sox series last week was a confluence of factors. Weather was not likely a motivator for the decision, but may have been a secondary factor that made the decision more palatable.

 

I was saying here that when the high for a day barely gets above 40, and the low is right around freezing, it's very hard for teams to still do night games.  My point was to make it easier for cold weather teams by giving them 3 of the first 4 series on the road, with that one home opening series on a weekend, where scheduling day games is not at all questionable.  That's hardly extraordinary.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I was saying here that when the high for a day barely gets above 40, and the low is right around freezing, it's very hard for teams to still do night games.  My point was to make it easier for cold weather teams by giving them 3 of the first 4 series on the road, with that one home opening series on a weekend, where scheduling day games is not at all questionable.  That's hardly extraordinary.

Yes, and they largely already do this. There have been 12 MLB seasons since Target Field opened, and the Twins have been scheduled to open on the road in 9 of them -- and 8 of those, they opened with two consecutive road series. (One of the years they opened at home was due to a scheduling conflict with the Final Four.) The past 4 seasons have seen our home opening series on a Thursday-Saturday-Sunday too, all day games, with the Friday kept open for a potential postponement.

 

The post to which you originally responded was itself responding to this claim: "Twins should not have any home games the first 10 games - weather." By your own comments, it seems you agree that is not practical or realistic, so I'm not sure what you are arguing here.

[Nine of twelve]

 

Twins should not have any home games the first 10 games - weather.

 

Based on today's weather, this logic says that the Twins should not have any home games the first 30 games.

[Craig Arko]

 

Based on today's weather, this logic says that the Twins should not have any home games the first 30 games.

And one logical extrapolation is that the Twins should not have any home games.  

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

Yes, and they largely already do this. There have been 12 MLB seasons since Target Field opened, and the Twins have been scheduled to open on the road in 9 of them -- and 8 of those, they opened with two consecutive road series. (One of the years they opened at home was due to a scheduling conflict with the Final Four.) The past 4 seasons have seen our home opening series on a Thursday-Saturday-Sunday too, all day games, with the Friday kept open for a potential postponement.

 

The post to which you originally responded was itself responding to this claim: "Twins should not have any home games the first 10 games - weather." By your own comments, it seems you agree that is not practical or realistic, so I'm not sure what you are arguing here.

 

I was arguing the idea that there are 16 teams that have identical weather situations as the Twins.  I think there are 8 others, and 7 more that you'd want to skew towards being more on the road than at home over the first couple of weeks.  The facts that you pointed out about this already being done, simply proves the point I'm making.  MLB can easily limit home series for teams more likely to experience inclement weather in the first part of April--that was the point I was making to nine of twelve who was suggesting there were too many cold weather teams top realistically do this.

 

On a separate note, it's been too long since we've had a debate!  I miss doing that with you, because you always bring the data, so I always feel like I learn something when we engage.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

that was the point I was making to nine of twelve who was suggesting there were too many cold weather teams top realistically do this.

I think you misread that post. It specifically said that they can't realistically play their first 10 games on the road every year, not that they can't do their current schedule. I'm not really interested in quibbling with that.