ashbury

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3728[/ATTACH] There is already a lengthy thread in the forum, about the Twins' abortive offer to let fans watch home-team batting practice for $15; I did not get too worked up about the topic at first but I contributed and the obsessive reader may see a theme or two repeated here. Well written essays, pro and con, are also found at http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/44474154/ and http://www.brandonwarne.com/2013/04/11/charging-to-watch-bp-my-take/ among others. To me, the problem is shocking tone-deafness on the part of the team, to the romance of their sport. Sports are often equated to entertainments like movies, and no one expects to come in early to a movie and see filmed rehearsals of the actors struggling through their lines. (Instead you are subjected to ads and bogus quizzes on screen.) They got rid of the cartoon before or after the feature film, long ago. And no one likes the prices of concessions any better there than at the ballpark, but like at the ballpark, some people pay and some people gripe and some people do both. But sports, and baseball in particular, aren't necessarily like other entertainments in all ways. BP (in double particular) is a mixture of tradition and romance. What do you actually learn from watching BP? Not much, and in fact the prime age for watching might be pre-teen on up through college or so - exactly when you would like to make sure you've hooked your future customers. And even at those ages, probably the second time they go early for BP they'll end up engaging in horseplay in between dives for home run balls, or wander around looking for something to eat. It's not the activity itself, it's the atmosphere. You're watching what goes on before the curtain really goes up. It's reported that the teams in Washington and Cleveland open their gates 2.5 hours before first pitch. I would be curious to see how the Twins might respond to this. "Oh, well, Washington and Cleveland, sure, they can do this, because..." what? Ushers and security staff cost less there? Fans there are much better behaved and won't spray graffiti on the walls like unsupervised Twins fans would? No one in Washington or Cleveland actually takes them up on their bluff of an offer and the ballpark is essentially empty until 15 minutes before game time? Charging $15, or even more (Braves and Astros are among those offering VIP packages down on the field), positively kills that "behind the scenes" atmosphere. A VIP package may substitute a *different* atmosphere, an entitled feeling from having it made, well enough that you (or Dad) can plunk down the money (for you), but the romantic one is lost. The $15 makes you *part* of the scene, you're no longer behind it. And for what? 60 tickets times $15 means the Twins likely are being honest about only recouping the extra cost of having some fans come through the gate early, or as some people irrelevantly point out, what Joe Mauer is paid to tie his shoelaces before a game, unless he pays someone to do that for him. But is that the smartest way to manage this $1000 per game? No one's asking to be let in free; they already have a ticket (perhaps at a cut rate from StubHub, and maybe that's sticking in the team's craw?). Could the Twins not gain that much in goodwill by having a policy that the first 60 fans in line with tickets can just come in at X o'clock? Or make it a lottery, or something; never mind, I need a real PR expert to figure out how to not disappoint the family driving from Ft. Dodge or Fargo with that plan. Or, open just one gate that allows access to the outfield seats, come-one-come-all, open up a concession stand selling burgers and overpriced soda, and recoup the lost $1000 from the 500 hardy fans who like to be there early. It's not like there's a risk of the high-priced ticket holders using this as a ruse to stay in the cheap seats when the game starts. And we're not talking about letting hobos in without a ticket. Behavior problems can be dealt with as strictly, or maybe even more so, as/than at the game itself; getting kicked out during BP and not seeing the game at all would be something a rowdy teen would remember and avoid happening again, but this seems really overthinking it except that you do have to have security on hand. With regard to the argument that it's just offering something (for a price) currently unavailable (at any price), thus increasing freedom or something or other, the problem is that BP means more to people than just a commodity like a toaster. That's the "romantic" part I was getting at. BP's something that has been taken away over a long period of time, quietly and somewhat ad-hoc. I remember being very shocked the first time I went to a game at the Dome and had to wait and wait for the gates to open and by then BP was just ending, maybe just a few of the road team's scrubinis. So apparently I had been accustomed to seeing BP at Fenway, Baltimore, and wherever else I had seen major league ballgames by that time (as a kid I lived in barren Indianapolis so I didn't have MLB to go by). Later, I remember driving through Waterloo Iowa, pulling up to the ballpark on a whim and learning that the game would start 2.5 hours later but "come on in, go back and by a ticket when the office opens later". I know that low-A is not the majors, but what I would *like* to feel is "come on in, you're welcome to wander around," and currently the attitude is "gates don't open for a while," and now this new wrinkle is "oh, well, sure, you'd be welcome if you fork over an additional $15". I'm more on the rational/analytic end of the spectrum than most. If this stream of memories of Waterloo Iowa is what comes to mind from news of this $15 idea, it speaks to how BP is more of a deeply emotional issue than a matter of monetizing a commodity. Our society tried to reject "monetization equals freedom" in the sixties (remember the backlash against "status symbols"?) but in the long run the monetizers have won out; there's a stock market segment in the hard news on even a nominally leftist media outlet like NPR nowadays, for goodness sake. The aim to bring a business mentality to every aspect of life would be shocking even to the Mad Men of the 50s-60s. And this trial balloon by the Twins touches some of us in this way. There is a borrowed word, lagniappe, that roughly means a Freebie, as from a merchant. If MLB teams want to stress how much they run their businesses *as* businesses, they should remember that this word exists, and that not every business decision has to be made by the people wearing the green eyeshades. They have plenty of extra-cost options already to which their solution is "well, then don't buy it". Maybe it's *smart* business, here, to give away something that is widely perceived to be of value but which they can apparently envision making only $1000 a game from anyway. Their tone-deafness on the romance of the game risks making people think of Monty Burns shuddering at the thought of ever giving anything away.

Thanks.

How come all the staff photos on the About Twins Daily page lean to the right? A political statement? Badly tailored suit trousers? /edit: Also, where is teh Rocket Pig? Is he too ugly to contemplate showing, or does he just lean to the left?

Kind of like the conversations you may have at a ballpark. I like this style. YMMV.

At some point don't the current-season standings determine the claiming order? Maybe after the trading deadline?

Everything about your offer sounds great, except that I would have to set foot in Tucson.

I think the better translation is "Freebie", and it isn't hard to imagine them doing a Monty Burns shudder at *that* word. Also, I was wrong about it being French. In writing this up for my blog, I checked and found that it's either Creole or Spanish or Cajun or all or none or something. Mark Twain may have popularized it, accounting for some fuzziness on fact.

Came back to say this as well. In this thread I've expressed only the negative, but this writer took the time to present a balanced and thoughtful view that pretty much echoes my own feelings but said better.

In the unlikely event you mean from me, on this forum I am the very model of an irresponsible poster and rumormonger; it's a nice break from work. Actually 70charger elaborated in a way that expressed what was behind my terse comment. In his short time in the Twins organization, Michael hasn't shown me a lot at the plate to make him look like a future starter (good fundamental scouts might strongly disagree). JB's thread-starter expressed surprise that Molitor included him in the list of players he's looking at. I believe it's true that you can't trade a draftee in his first year, but now Michael is tradeable, and if some other team senses a higher ceiling than the Twins do, maybe the Twins would want to cross-check in some fashion; I could see packaging him with Willingham to snag a stronger prospect than Willingham alone. Of course, you wouldn't publicize this if it were true, so actually I don't put the odds very high. I was just commenting that lumping Michael together with Sano and Rosario in that context might not mean he's on a par with them as a prospect.

Learn from the mistake instead of doubling down, my brother.

I agree with your assessment; most teams in my experience welcome your finding an usher and telling them someone is doing this. It's not tattling.

It may or may not be a positive thing for him to be scouting Michael. They could be considering trading him.

I would like to see how the Twins might respond to this. "Oh, well, Washington and Cleveland, they can do this, because..." what? Ushers and security staff cost less there? Fans there are much better behaved and won't spray graffiti on the walls like unsupervised Twins fans would? No one in Washington or Cleveland actually takes them up on the offer and the ballpark is essentially empty until 15 minutes before gametime?

From the ST article: "I haven’t talked to him about it, because I always have to calm down before I talk to people." "... and I find that talking to the media has that desired calming effect. Thanks guys. I'm ready to go face Aaron now." To me, this is starting to seem like erratic behavior. One theory would be that it's calculated: he was not in favor of trading both center fielders and is now letting Ryan see I Told You So in print. For what good purpose, I can't begin to guess, unless he wishes to be fired.

Nice job, Seth.

It's too bad the Mets travel on to Denver, otherwise they could drop Hicks off at Rochester on their way home Sunday night.

Carroll will be a 0.000001 WAR player at the rate he's currently being used.

I don't think anyone's asking to be let in free. The $15 is on top of the price of a ticket, no? Moreover if the math is correct that they need 60 people at this price to pay for the extra staff, then they are saying that it's not a good investment of ~$1000 per game to let ticket holders in an hour earlier and enjoy themselves. Again, they're not letting hobos in from off the street, these are the folks who've ponied up something to attend the game. Maybe it just gripes them that some are getting in cheap via StubHub, and this BP surcharge can't be gotten around that way, hah, take that, rabble!

This is sound baseball logic and can not be refuted.

Annnnd... Rally Avatar is down. Really not sure what to do with her. She has failed as a starter and now as a closer. Promising rookie, but a proper role must be determined. Edit: Yesterday's rally avatar will not return. In scouting terms, didn't have the good face. Today's, my scouts inform me, does not suffer from that defect, and appears to have good makeup as well.

Yes, I now see the wisdom in the earlier comment to fire him if he takes advice from TD.

Bad series, get 'em Friday, don't miss the effing team plane.

All right, Twins batters, Rally Avatar is now up. Win this one.

Let's take a vote on that and submit it to Ryan.