Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, October 15, 2012

Leitch: I know you’ll never love the Cardinals as much as I do.

I have spent so much time watching the Cardinals, reveling in their victories and agonizing in their defeats, that I had forgotten that the rest of the world was watching them, too. (I forget this sometimes, too. I love my sports teams so much that it almost seems strange that the other sports fans notice them at all. Sometimes I’ll see an Illini score on the ESPN crawl and it’s like Anderson Cooper doing a news item on how your cousin’s final exams at a college are going.) And the rest of the world, to my astoundment, hates the Cardinals. The rest of the world was cheering for the young, likable, fiery Washington Nationals, with their superstar youngsters and their facial hair and their natty natitude. The Cardinals weren’t the heroes to them; they were the brutish villains, the Cobra Kai, the Empire, stomping on the dreams of the upstart rebellion.

When did you start hating the Cardinals? Obviously everyone hates them now, but for me it was October 19, 2006. The Braves suddenly were no longer the team Phillies fans viewed with envy and hatred, for whom everything seemed to work out better than expected (in the regular season at least). The Cardinals easily slid into their place after destroying the hopes of the Mets and ruining what should have been an all-time classic moment (Endy Chavez Game 7 catch ... but his team lost). Since I know a lot of Mets fans and have never met a Cardinals fan, this was a formative moment.

Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 15, 2012 at 10:33 AM | 258 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: cardinals, evil, fandom, nationals

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3 > 
   101. Portia Stanke Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:20 PM (#4271393)

More "intellectually," a Tigers-Cardinals really isn't the "World Series" in the true meaning of that term, as it doesn't match the two best or two most-accomplished teams from the American and National Leauges. It's the "MLB Playoff Finals." We shouldn't kid ourselves and pretend that break from tradition hasn't diminished fan interest -- it clearly has.


The last is clearly untrue: interest in baseball has never been higher than it is today and the vast majority of fans enjoy the expanded playoffs. It's only the self-appointed guardians of tradition who make ridiculous claims about the "true meaning" of this and that, as though Abner Doubleday descended from Mount Sinai with tablets of stone instructing the custodians of MLB to have only a single round of playoffs. There is no Constitution of Baseball to defend. Snap out of it.
   102. Ok, Griffey's Dunn (Nothing Iffey About Griffey) Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:21 PM (#4271394)
this is the fan base that:

--drove adam dunn out of town
--harrassed and nitpicked ken griffey jr thoughout his stay


Just following the lead of our HOF announcer, Harv...

edit: Adam Dunn is one of my favorite players ever, didn't want to see him leave, but, by 2008, it was time for he and the Reds to part ways. Jr got a raw deal, but, then he didn't come anywhere close to filling Reds fans expectations. Nor his own, most likely. Plus, neither of them were top-of-the-line starters and that's what the Reds really needed those years.

edit edit: Harveys, I should have read your next post. A lot of it was definitely Marty. As he goes, so follows the Reds' fan base.

   103. Tippecanoe Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:21 PM (#4271395)
So, Sporting News...Bob Costas...Joe Buck...it comes from the city's overwhelming media presence!?!
   104. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:21 PM (#4271396)
I never truly hated the Cardinals until the Pujols Game.
   105. VoodooR Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:26 PM (#4271406)
I stopped hating the Cardinals on or around October 27. 2011. As a Cubs fan, I figured it was my duty to hate the Cardinals, so I dutifully cheered against them at any given opportunity and whenever their name came up I made some obligatory comment about hating them. What changed is that I decided that "sports hate" is stupid. I may be a Cubs fan, but what I really am is a baseball fan and last October the Cardinals provided some amazing baseball and then they turn around and do it again this year. I'm done hating them. I'm done hating other athletes and teams. It's silly. Not as silly as the trollish rantings of SBB and Sam, but silly nonetheless.
   106. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:30 PM (#4271413)
The last is clearly untrue: interest in baseball has never been higher than it is today and the vast majority of fans enjoy the expanded playoffs.

You're on psychotropics if you think interest in the 2012 playoffs is higher than in the pre-wild card era. What's the evidence for this claim? The empty seats in Yankee Stadium for ALCS games? The sub-NFL-Draft TV ratings?
   107. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:30 PM (#4271414)
griff

the reds fans didn't use to be like this. it's kind of alarming actually. the passion has a real edge to it.

   108. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:31 PM (#4271415)
(What perpetuates it, of course, is this notion of "OMG greatest fans in BASEBALL #1#1#1" that gets put forward. I can easily root for them to lose just so that those greatest fans can choke on it.)


And we'll take it in stride and follow our glorious leader (Whiney Herzog) and find a way to blame it on some random crap (Denkinger, Home field advantage etc) :)


cfb

apparently folks forget it now but it was bob costas who took the ball and ran with it as the nbc ballgame of the week guy

between the st louis roots of tsn, bob and joe g one could allege it was a 'plot'

ha, ha


I would prefer a plot that ensures multiple consecutive world series victory.
   109. GuyM Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:31 PM (#4271416)
More "intellectually," a Tigers-Cardinals really isn't the "World Series" in the true meaning of that term, as it doesn't match the two best or two most-accomplished teams from the American and National Leauges. It's the "MLB Playoff Finals." We shouldn't kid ourselves and pretend that break from tradition hasn't diminished fan interest -- it clearly has.

Yes, it's only the greedy owners who like a system that keeps more teams in contention later in the season. That's why teams drew 14,000 fans per game back in the Golden Age of 1968.
   110. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:33 PM (#4271420)
Yes, it's only the greedy owners who like a system that keeps more teams in contention later in the season.

Teams like the Cardinals stay "in contention," but teams like the Yankees and Nationals don't get their just reward. Their just reward is a division title that means something, and a postseason spot much closer to the ultimate prize than a best-of-5 against the fifth-place team in the league.

I'm sure that the "fans" don't mind it; after all, the interests of the good but not great -- typically in the name of "fairness" -- will always trump the interests of the cream of the system and the truly accomplished. One wouldn't expect American fans to be able to distinguish the two.
   111. Alex meets the threshold for granular review Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:35 PM (#4271421)
I never truly hated the Cardinals until the Pujols Game.


Funnily enough, this was the game that turned me into a baseball fan.
   112. Ok, Griffey's Dunn (Nothing Iffey About Griffey) Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:39 PM (#4271430)
griff
the reds fans didn't use to be like this. it's kind of alarming actually. the passion has a real edge to it.


Harvey

I think living through Leatherpants Bowden's lying, Bob Boone, major league manager, and Fat Jimmy Haynes, Opening Day starter was enough to put the fanbase permanently on edge. :-) It's hard to imagine any of the current players being run out of town... This city truly loves the current team.
   113. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:40 PM (#4271431)
That's the curse of the LDS. By the time the first week in October rolls around, everyone is ready for playoff baseball and the games are pretty compelling -- then you realize that they've made the LCS and the World Series far worse than it should be. The complete apathy in NYC for the LCS is a compelling leading indicator of just how diluted the postseason is and how fans are finally figuring it out. The Yankees are not selling out LCS games, in a stadium that seats less than 50,000 people.

This was wrong yesterday, and it still is. The expanded playoffs are selling out everywhere except the new, expensive and unliked stadium of a team that has made the postseason almost every year for two decades, and which has fielded a 2012 team that its fanbase doesn't seem to like. NYS attendance in a vacuum from attendance at other parks is a terrible indicator of fan reaction to the "diluted" postseason, and it certainly isn't compelling.
   114. salvomania Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:41 PM (#4271432)
SBB, ignoring for the sake of discussion their 2012 won-loss record, do you believe that the Cardinals, as currently constituted, are the 5th-best team in the National League?
   115. BDC Posted: October 15, 2012 at 04:59 PM (#4271449)
I don't think that interest in the World Series has abated, though actually having gotten to the last two in person may bias me. I do think that the LCS ain't quite what it used to be in their golden era 1976-86 :) and that the four first-round series (not to mention the play-in) are approaching NBA-in-May levels of exhaustion – they're not there yet, perhaps, but you can see it in the distance. More of a good thing is not always better. But once we're down to two teams, the excitement is as high as ever, especially given a decent matchup. And it continues to attract casual fans, just as the World Cup and the Olympics attract me.
   116. GuyM Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:00 PM (#4271451)
We shouldn't kid ourselves and pretend that break from tradition hasn't diminished fan interest -- it clearly has.

I'm sure that the "fans" don't mind it; after all, the interests of the good but not great -- typically in the name of "fairness" -- will always trump the interests of the cream of the system and the truly accomplished. One wouldn't expect American fans to be able to distinguish the two

You just have to laugh.....
   117. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:03 PM (#4271456)
We shouldn't kid ourselves and pretend that break from tradition hasn't diminished fan interest -- it clearly has.

I'm sure that the "fans" don't mind it; after all, the interests of the good but not great -- typically in the name of "fairness" -- will always trump the interests of the cream of the system and the truly accomplished. One wouldn't expect American fans to be able to distinguish the two


You cannot be serious about this. That is the most backwards thing ever said on this site. Fan interest has risen because of expanded playoffs, to deny that is insane/ridiculous/stupid. Now if you are saying it might have diminished interest in the last seven games of the post season, there might be a little bit of truth to that, but on the whole, baseball popularity/profit/interest is much higher than it was in the 70's or 60's etc, and that was when they were basically the only game in town.
   118. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:04 PM (#4271457)
This was wrong yesterday, and it still is. The expanded playoffs are selling out everywhere except the new, expensive and unliked stadium of a team that has made the postseason almost every year for two decades, and which has fielded a 2012 team that its fanbase doesn't seem to like. NYS attendance in a vacuum from attendance at other parks is a terrible indicator of fan reaction to the "diluted" postseason, and it certainly isn't compelling.

Actually, it's a leading indicator.
   119. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:09 PM (#4271464)
You cannot be serious about this. That is the most backwards thing ever said on this site. Fan interest has risen because of expanded playoffs, to deny that is insane/ridiculous/stupid. Now if you are saying it might have diminished interest in the last seven games of the post season, there might be a little bit of truth to that, but on the whole, baseball popularity/profit/interest is much higher than it was in the 70's or 60's etc, and that was when they were basically the only game in town.

Not if attendance at NYS this postseason is your sole barometer for fan interest!
   120. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:10 PM (#4271466)
Fan interest has risen because of expanded playoffs, to deny that is insane/ridiculous/stupid.

If you're talking about the regular season, we've been through this a million times -- attendance is higher because the mallparks are better places to while away a summer afternoon or evening than the parks of yore. Where there are no mallparks, yet very good teams (Oakland and Tampa), attendance is no different than 1975-91 and worse than in the best markets of that time. The Yankee Stadium attendances and ticket prices confirm this; there's no more demand to go to that mallpark for an LCS game than a whole bunch of regular season games. Why? Because large swaths of people aren't going for the baseball -- even in New York.
   121. bunyon Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:11 PM (#4271468)
Indeed. Most of the changes to MLB in my lifetime have resulted in me liking MLB less - the loud piped in music and other effects, the relentless zoom in TV shots and over the top dramatic cliches of modern announcing, the expanded playoffs, the interleague games, the ASG that COUNTS!, etc.


But the evidence is pretty clear that these things make MLB a lot of money relative to how they used to do it. MLB would be crazy not to keep with the trend.


I was telling someone the other day how much I love baseball and they asked how much I spend on it. It occured to me that I don't really spend anything on it. I bought Dad ExtraInnings once but don't have it myself. I don't subscribe to MLB online services. I haven't been to a MLB game in 5 years - and that was with family we were visiting and they paid.

Basically, I love the sport but the actual experience of attending is less and less gratifying. And I find the regular and post-seasons less and less compelling.


However, I'm a demographic outlier. I don't like most of the things that are very popular and like stuff that isn't. That doesn't make me cool and I'm not judging - a company would be a fool to make me a target.
   122. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:13 PM (#4271471)
Actually, it's a leading indicator.

Please explain, with reference to why every other team selling out all postseason games (except Texas's mid-day play-in, I believe) does not indicate sustained fan interest in the "diluted" postseason.
   123. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:16 PM (#4271476)
Please explain, with reference to why every other team selling out all postseason games (except Texas's mid-day play-in, I believe) does not indicate sustained fan interest in the "diluted" postseason.

It's the beginning of a trend that's going to hit postseason gates and interest in other cities in the coming years. Fans in regular postseason participant markets will become blase about the tournament, as has clearly happened in New York.(*)

Of course, the measure of interest isn't just attendance; it's also TV ratings which continue to languish far below the ratings of LCS and World Series games of yore. People just aren't as interested in the baseball postseason as they used to be. There are too many games, too many flukish outcomes, too many matchups of the less deserving.

(*) I believe there has been a non-sellout in Detroit this postseason also.
   124. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:21 PM (#4271481)
Where there are no mallparks, yet very good teams (Oakland and Tampa), attendance is no different than 1975-91 and worse than in the best markets of that time.

The A's drew almost twice as many fans this year as they did in 1974, when they were in the process of winning their third consecutive World Series.
   125. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:23 PM (#4271483)
If you're talking about the regular season, we've been through this a million times -- attendance is higher because the mallparks are better places to while away a summer afternoon or evening than the parks of yore. Where there are no mallparks, yet very good teams (Oakland and Tampa), attendance is no different than 1975-91 and worse than in the best markets of that time. The Yankee Stadium attendances and ticket prices confirm this; there's no more demand to go to that mallpark for an LCS game than a whole bunch of regular season games. Why? Because large swaths of people aren't going for the baseball -- even in New York.


We haven't been through this before. I don't have a clue what a mallpark is. There is a game going on, you pay a ticket to go to a stadium, you watch the game. The stadium may or may not have other crap to do, if you consider St louis stadium to be a mallpark, then your definition of a mallpark is insane.

Attendance is up for lots of reasons, mostly being that there are more people in the population to go, but who cares why it's up, the simple fact of the matter is that it is up. Per game attendance over the past decade blows away per game attendance any time prior. It's not a debate, you can't debate facts.

Of course, the measure of interest isn't just attendance; it's also TV ratings which continue to languish far below the ratings of LCS and World Series games of yore. People just aren't as interested in the baseball postseason as they used to be.


That has to be the most uninformed comment ever. ALL tv ratings are down for everything. In the 70's and even the 80's a 20 share would land you in the bottom quartile of tv ratings and threaten you with cancellation, nowadays a 10 share is a hit show.

   126. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:24 PM (#4271485)
Fans in regular postseason participants will become blase about the tournament


Surely the Cardinals would be a good test of this hypothesis?
   127. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:24 PM (#4271486)
It is you who are confused here. Citing the Cards' pythag record directly addresses the objection that the "best" teams deserve to be in the post-season. This year they are clearly one of the 2 or 3 best teams in the league. If someone wants to say "the teams with the most wins should be in the playoffs," then fine -- pythag is obviously not a relevant response to that.


Are you really this stupid?
   128. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:26 PM (#4271488)
It's the beginning of a trend that's going to hit postseason gates and interest in other cities in the coming years. Fans in regular postseason participant markets will become blase about the tournament, as has clearly happened in New York.(*)


What is it that you're envisioning happening here? And whatever it is, didn't it happen over ten years ago, with the vanguard being Atlanta? I think I was hearing jokes about Braves fans not caring about playoff games before I had my first email address.

And who are the "regular postseason participation markets" anyway, other than 1) New York, and 2) St. Louis, Home Of History's Best Fans who would obviously never become blasé?
   129. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:28 PM (#4271492)
I think teams that have equal Pythag records are equally good. If one of them won five more games than the other one, that means they were five games luckier. Does that make me a stats geek?


Yes. I'm stunned you bother to follow the actual results at all. Why not just run 1000 Diamond Mind simulations instead? Hell, that's how they do things on Wall Street these days, right?
   130. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:32 PM (#4271496)
Yes. I'm stunned you bother to follow the actual results at all. Why not just run 1000 Diamond Mind simulations instead? Hell, that's how they do things on Wall Street these days, right?


I know it's your habit to imagine people are saying things that they really aren't. All he is pointing out is that he considers teams with equal pyth to be equally talented teams. The standings are the standings. But when people say derisively about a team with a poor record who had a good pyth "they are only a 88 win team"... the point is that they were a more talented team than their actual won loss record indicates.


You don't have to agree with that, and he's not saying that the standings should be determined by pyth record, he's just saying that his evaluations/opinion of the quality of the team starts with pyth record over actual won/loss record.
   131. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:37 PM (#4271499)
I guess this is some sort of controversy over what the word "good" means. I mean, if you have 1000 of the aforementioned Diamond Mind simulations, the exact same team will win widely varying numbers of games. That must mean that in various parallel universes the same team, doing the exact same things, can be both good and bad, depending on the order in which they do those things (which manifests most clearly as their record in one-run games).
   132. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:38 PM (#4271500)
The A's drew almost twice as many fans this year as they did in 1974, when they were in the process of winning their third consecutive World Series.

1974 wasn't in my time period, and I've never called that time a "Golden Age" or any such thing.

The A's drew 1.3M more fans in 1990. They've drawn almost 3M to the Coliseum. They drew more in 1982 than 2012.

The 2012 A's also drew far fewer fans than went to the concrete circles in the late 70s, as shown by the following random figures:

Montreal, 1979: 2.1M
Philly, 1978: 2.5M
Cincy, 1978: 2.5M
San Fran, 1978: 1.7M
St. Louis, 1979: 1.6M
Los Angeles, 1978: 3.3M
Los Angeles, 1979: 2.8M

To be fair, Pittsburgh, which has never really drawn that well, drew only 1.4M to Three Rivers in 1979.

Then there's Tampa, a team that drew 1.55M to a grungy dome with a very appealing and successful young team. Let's compare good years for not quite as good a team that played in a grungy dome in the 80s:

Houston, 1980: 2.3M
Houston, 1986: 1.73M
Houston, 1987: 1.9M

Taken together with the TV ratings, which have precipitously dropped, there's little evidence that baseball qua baseball is any more popular now than it was 30 years ago.
   133. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:47 PM (#4271505)
1974 wasn't in my time period

(Eyeroll.) Fine, use 1975 then, even though leaguewide attendance dropped by a couple hundred thousand between the two seasons. This year's A's outdrew the division-winning, three-time-defending-champion '75 team by 600,000.
   134. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:48 PM (#4271506)
(Eyeroll.) Fine, use 1975 then, even though leaguewide attendance dropped by a couple hundred thousand between the two seasons. This year's A's outdrew the division-winning, three-time-defending-champion '75 team by 600,000.

They didn't outdraw 1982 and they were 1.3M short of 1990. Though it's better than in a lot of years, the A's attendance is far short of peak. The population of the Bay Area and the United States has also grown since 1980; that alone should be driving attendance up.

And it's not just Oakland, it's Tampa.
   135. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:50 PM (#4271508)
The point is, Eric J, that Selig has been a disaster for baseball because the crowds have either gotten smaller, indicating less interest in the sport, or they have gotten larger, indicating that true fans have been replaced by mallpark posers. Also, the hypothetical 1980 Tropicana Field located in Houston had so much better fan turnout than Tropicana Field does now.
   136. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:50 PM (#4271509)
Montreal, 1979: 2.1M
Philly, 1978: 2.5M
Cincy, 1978: 2.5M
San Fran, 1978: 1.7M
St. Louis, 1979: 1.6M
Los Angeles, 1978: 3.3M
Los Angeles, 1979: 2.8M



Random? You choose a year for Montreal that they were 4th in attendance...let's look at that year.

Tm    Attendance Attend/G  1979 National League
                         
LAD      2860954    35320
PHI      2775011    34259
CIN      2356933    29462
MON      2102173    25953
HOU      1900312    23461
CHC      1648587    20353
STL      1627256    19845
SDP      1456967    17987
SFG      1456402    17980
PIT      1435454    17722
NYM       788905     9621
ATL       769465     9740 


Best team drew an average of 35,000, worse team drew an average of 9700...

Let's look at this year.

Tm    Attendance Attend/G  2012 National League
                         
PHI      3565718    44021
SFG      3377371    41696
LAD      3324246    41040
STL      3262109    40273
CHC      2882756    35590
MIL      2831385    34955
COL      2630458    32475
ATL      2420171    29879
WSN      2370794    29269
CIN      2347251    28978
NYM      2242803    27689
MIA      2219444    27401
ARI      2177617    26884
SDP      2123721    26219
PIT      2091918    25826
HOU      1607733    19849 


Very comparable.
The worse team(that is the 16th ranked team) Out drew 6 out of 12 teams(including my Cardinals), and the 15th worse team outdrew all but four teams from that year...yep attendance is an issue. (I hope you get the sarcasm)
   137. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:52 PM (#4271510)
You're comparing mallpark to ballpark/concrete circle. That's not the relevant comparison.

If baseball has grown so much in core popularity, why are the crowds in Oakland tepid and the crowds in Tampa terrible? Tampa draws way less than the good Astro teams drew to the craptastic Astrodome in the 80s. Why do the A's draw way less than the concrete circles -- supposedly the worst creations in the history of man -- drew in the 70s and 80s?
   138. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:52 PM (#4271511)
It's the beginning of a trend that's going to hit postseason gates and interest in other cities in the coming years. Fans in regular postseason participant markets will become blase about the tournament, as has clearly happened in New York.(*)
OK, so we’re agreed that sustained dominance can dilute fan interest in the playoffs. Cool!

   139. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:54 PM (#4271513)
Sticking with the A's, since they've played in the same park the entire time. From 1969-93, they averaged 17,233 fans per game. From 1994-present, they've averaged 20,915. This, despite being a slightly worse team on average (.519 WP to .522), and certainly a less-accomplished team (5 division titles and no WS appearances to 10 division titles and 4 World Series wins).
   140. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:58 PM (#4271518)
And it's funny that you choose Los Angeles for your list of random teams, prior to 1987 they were the only team in history to draw over 3 million fans in a season. Now we get several teams a year that do it.
   141. JJ1986 Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:59 PM (#4271519)
What is a mallpark? I've been to the new stadiums in Philly, Washington and Queens and they simply aren't places you would want to hang out unless you were there to watch baseball.
   142. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 05:59 PM (#4271520)
You're comparing mallpark to ballpark/concrete circle. That's not the relevant comparison.


I don't know what a mallpark is. Better designed stadium with comfort? Is St Louis a mall park, and if so, why?
   143. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:01 PM (#4271522)
I don't know why it matters about the park design, you are paying for a ticket to a baseball game, I can't imagine a mall that has a $20 minimum cover charge doing much business.
   144. GuyM Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:02 PM (#4271523)
It is you who are confused here. Citing the Cards' pythag record directly addresses the objection that the "best" teams deserve to be in the post-season. This year they are clearly one of the 2 or 3 best teams in the league. If someone wants to say "the teams with the most wins should be in the playoffs," then fine -- pythag is obviously not a relevant response to that.

Are you really this stupid?

Why don't you explain your disagreement? Try to use small words, so I can understand.....
   145. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:03 PM (#4271525)
Oakland A's
Year   Finish Attendance Attend/G       Rank
                                            
2012        1    1679013    20729 12th of 14
2011        3    1476791    18232 14th of 14
2010        2    1418391    17511 13th of 14
2009        4    1408783    17392 14th of 14
2008        3    1665256    20559 13th of 14
2007        3    1921844    23726 12th of 14
2006        1    1976625    24403 12th of 14
2005        2    2109118    26038  8th of 14
2004        2    2201516    27179  7th of 14
2003        1    2216596    27365  6th of 14
2002        1    2169811    26788  8th of 14
2001        2    2133277    26337  7th of 14
2000        1    1603744    19799 11th of 14
1999        2    1434610    17711 12th of 14
1998        4    1232343    15214 13th of 14
1997        4    1264218    15608 14th of 14
1996        3    1148380    14178 14th of 14
1995        4    1174310    16310 12th of 14
1994        2    1242692    22191 13th of 14
1993        7    2035025    25124 11th of 14
1992        1    2494160    30792  4th of 14
1991        4    2713493    33500  3rd of 14
1990        1    2900217    35805  2nd of 14
1989        1    2667225    32929  2nd of 14
1988        1    2287335    28239  7th of 14
1987        3    1678921    20727 11th of 14
1986        3    1314646    15839 11th of 14
1985        4    1334599    16894 11th of 14
1984        4    1353281    16707 11th of 14
1983        4    1294941    15987 11th of 14
1982        5    1735489    21426  6th of 14
1981        1    1304052    23287  4th of 14
1980        2     842259    10398 12th of 14
1979        7     306763     3787 14th of 14
1978        6     526999     6587 14th of 14
1977        7     495599     6119 14th of 14
1976        2     780593     9637 11th of 12
1975        1    1075518    13278  6th of 12
1974        1     845693    10441 11th of 12
1973        1    1000763    12355  8th of 12
1972        1     921323    11965  5th of 12
1971        1     914993    11296  7th of 12
1970        2     778355     9609  9th of 12
1969        2     778232     9608  8th of 12
1968        6     837466    10090  8th of 10 

   146. BDC Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:04 PM (#4271527)
Texas's mid-day play-in

Baltimore @ Texas was a night game. (Sorry, this is BBTF, where we correct things :) It didn't sell out, but it drew more fans than a lot of the Rangers' "sellouts" this year. I'd say there were >45K people in the seats. I went walkabout midgame because it was so desperately awful, and ended up in the only really open section, third deck in left field, where nobody ever sits. I think they didn't sell all the tickets because it wasn't till two days before that anybody in DFW suspected there could possibly be such a game, and when it happened it was a shock and a downer. But it still drew very well.

EDIT: To clarify "walkabout": I had a ticket in third deck, right field, which was packed, and I got tired of sitting next to other people, especially the nice young Orioles fan sitting next to me, who deserved to enjoy the game and not sit next to some goddamn Eeyore.
   147. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:09 PM (#4271529)
SBB, you remind me of a person I know who really loves practical movie effects. When CGI was invented, basically, movies became bad. It was inevitable. Movie makers who once relied on craft couldn't withstand the convenience of technological advances. He'll watch something like "Dead Heat" starring Joe Piscopo and Treat Williams, and marvel at how amazing the practical effects are, and then watch any blockbuster of the last 15 years and give some token praise but bemoan how it's just not possible to enjoy watching something that isn't subject to the laws of physics.

Likewise, when MLB expanded to have enough teams that it needed to let more than 4 of them into the playoffs, baseball became bad. It was inevitable. It couldn't withstand the trend from other sports which let virtually any team with a .500 record into the playoffs. Even though baseball still has far fewer playoff spots than other sports, it is now bad. Even the word "playoffs" is bad. It is not possible for more people to like baseball now than the number of people who liked it when it was good.
   148. salvomania Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:11 PM (#4271534)
I wonder if the A's would draw better if they had an owner that didn't actively disparage their current home.

Even if you're a fan, you may subconsciously be less inclined to shell out the bucks to go to a place that is marketed as a dump.
   149. salvomania Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:15 PM (#4271538)
Headline over at http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/:

LCS ratings are way up this year
   150. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:17 PM (#4271539)
What is a mallpark? I've been to the new stadiums in Philly, Washington and Queens and they simply aren't places you would want to hang out unless you were there to watch baseball.

Sure, they are -- and plenty of people do just that.

Here's a good ballpark vs. mallpark story published in SI a couple years ago -- it's about Philly:

As noted in Cliff zips beneath the overpass that leads to the Walt Whitman, the bridge no one needs to jump off anymore, and turns left onto Packer. Finally the forest of row houses sighs and surrenders to a vast clearing: the parking lot where the Vet used to be. Ahh, the memories... .

"It was San Quentin," says Head.

"It was a circular concrete slab of crap," says Boo.

"It was a green dying turd," says Dan Tarng, a first-generation Taiwanese-American fan who needs to meet Head and Boo.

"You'd sit there feeling like you needed to call the suicide hotline," says Jacklin Rhoads.

Jacklin? Is that ... a woman? Take a long look around as Citizens Bank Park's homey red bricks and towering light stanchions arise from the asphalt. Even now, four hours before game time, everywhere you look, something never seen before at ball games in Philly: females in droves. Queuing up for standing-room-only tickets, playing Beanbag Toss and Beer Pong amid a daily tailgating festival that used to materialize only on NFL Sundays. Teenage girls who don't hang at the mall anymore: They hang at CBP. Women in their 20s, 30s and 40s who don't have Girls Night Out or Happy Hour at bars or restaurants: They throw down light beer in the CBP parking lot, hard lemonades in the concourses, low-fat wraps and water ices on Ashburn Alley. They eyeball Cliff and Chase and Cole. The Phillies blew up San Quentin. They built Friday night on the boardwalk at the Jersey Shore.
   151. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:18 PM (#4271540)
Likewise, when MLB expanded to have enough teams that it needed to let more than 4 of them into the playoffs, baseball became bad. It was inevitable. It couldn't withstand the trend from other sports which let virtually any team with a .500 record into the playoffs. Even though baseball still has far fewer playoff spots than other sports, it is now bad. It is not possible for more people to like it now than the number of people who liked it when it was good.

Exactly. SBB's position that the expanded playoffs are hurting fan interest follows perfectly from his dislike for the expanded playoffs, just not from reality.

Now, if he wanted to forecast a long-term trend of diluted talent following expansion (# of teams), that might have some basis in what we've seen this October... (cross quoted from another thread, and presented more for shock value than a serious endorsement of the hypothetical trend)
2012 AL Postseason OPS

Detroit: .650
Yankees: .603
Rangers: .570
Oakland: .553
Orioles: .506


[146] No worries Bob, and thanks for confirming that it was indeed well attended.
   152. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:19 PM (#4271541)
Sure, they are -- and plenty of people do just that.


Again, I still don't know what a mallpark is. Is it someplace that you have to pay a ticket to get into and then you can hang around?
   153. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:22 PM (#4271544)
Reading that except, your definition of a mallpark is basically a place people would want to go to? A place that isn't an eyesore, that makes you not want to kill yourself, and has women at the park?

ghastly I know, letting those womenfolk into what used to be solely a mans bastion where you could quietly contemplate suicide as you drink beer and watch a game in peace and quiet.
   154. JJ1986 Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:24 PM (#4271545)
There is no reason to believe that those extra people going to CBP aren't going to watch baseball (unless you're arguing women don't watch baseball).
   155. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:24 PM (#4271546)
If I had to pick a "Golden Age" of baseball, in terms of pure interest in the sport, quality competition among most/all the markets, and quality/variety of play on the field, I'd say around 1978 to 1993 and if forced to narrow it further, I'd say 1988 to 1993 -- years having nothing to do with being a kid as I was 12 a decade-plus before 1988.

Coincidentally, or maybe not, the A's attendance figures reflect that. The game is no more popular now than when the A's had their big attendance run, and is almost certainly less popular.
   156. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:26 PM (#4271547)
There is no reason to believe that those extra people going to CBP aren't going to watch baseball (unless you're arguing women don't watch baseball).

Do people go to the boardwalk on the Jersey Shore on Friday night to watch baseball?

Is it someplace that you have to pay a ticket to get into and then you can hang around?

Yes. Maybe they don't do it in St. Louis, but yes.

Stadiums are no longer a bunch of seats, sparse restrooms, and a couple hot dog and beer stands. They're now a bunch of more comfortable seats, nightclubs, restaurants, cocktail lounges, wide areas to mingle and walk, and stores. With more and higher-quality chicks hanging out. Of course you're going to get more people to come to those places.
   157. JJ1986 Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:30 PM (#4271549)
Do people go to the boardwalk on the Jersey Shore on Friday night to watch baseball?


You're using a silly metaphor to prove a point?
   158. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:30 PM (#4271551)
There is no reason to believe that those extra people going to CBP aren't going to watch baseball (unless you're arguing women don't watch baseball).


I don't think he knows what a mallpark is, it's just a catch word he heard someplace and latched onto and now think every new park is one of those.
   159. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:32 PM (#4271552)
Stadiums are no longer a bunch of seats, sparse restrooms, and a couple hot dog and beer stands. They're now a bunch of more comfortable seats, nightclubs, restaurants, cocktail lounges, wide areas to mingle and walk, and stores. With more and higher-quality chicks hanging out. Of course you're going to get more people to come to those places.


Ok, what is wrong with that. You go to a game and you want to be comfortable, why would you want to pay outrageous prices for beer and food and not get good beer and food? or have a selection of choices?

Your definition of a mallpark is basically a well designed stadium that it isn't a chore to go to? People aren't paying ticket prices to get the privilege of paying for overpriced food. They are paying ticket prices to go to a game, comfort just makes it a more pleasurable experience.
   160. JJ1986 Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:33 PM (#4271554)
Baseball fans might be more likely to go to a "mallpark" than another stadium. That does not mean that the people going there are not baseball fans.
   161. Greg K Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:34 PM (#4271555)
Coincidentally, or maybe not, the A's attendance figures reflect that. The game is no more popular now than when the A's had their big attendance run, and is almost certainly less popular.

Coincidentally the A's were a really good team in those six years.
   162. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:35 PM (#4271559)
Ok, what is wrong with that.

Nothing. And a lot is right with that.

But that fact explains, to a large if not definitive degree, why baseball's attendance has gone up. It's not the underlying popularity of the sport itself, or the experience of paying attention to it live -- thus Oakland and Tampa -- it's the fact that a lot of people who don't care about baseball go to baseball games now that didn't BITD. Thus, we can't just say, "Attendance higher, popularity higher."
   163. JJ1986 Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:38 PM (#4271560)
The Phillies also had a bunch of good-looking (and greasy) white guys come up shortly after CBP opened, which could help explain a general increase in female fandom which would explain why more women are at the park. Doesn't mean they aren't there to watch the game.
   164. phredbird Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:41 PM (#4271561)
That's a big part of it. The old postseason wasn't so much "playoffs" as it was matchups of teams that had already won something challenging and worthwhile and were just trying to win what the Euro/Anglo soccer fan would call more "silverware" by winning each of the next two postseason series.


well i've been on this board constantly suggesting that baseball expand to 32 teams and do 8 4-team divisions and just get rid of the wild card. of course then you'll have whiny babies crying about teams winning crummy divisions and then getting hot.

the heck with it. you can't please everybody.
   165. Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:41 PM (#4271562)
Thus, we can't just say, "Attendance higher, popularity higher."

But we can and should say "lower attendance (at NYS, ignoring every other ballpark), popularity will eventually fall due to expanded playoffs"? I'm confoosed.

   166. phredbird Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:43 PM (#4271565)
5) Sneaking cash into incompetent umpires pockets to "interpret" an infield fly call like Rodney Dangerfield in "Caddyshack"-- "keep it fair, keep it fair".


fun's fun, but that's a pretty serious accusation.
   167. phredbird Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:46 PM (#4271566)
phredbird knew he was going to take a lot of crap in this thread, but he deserves a primey for #46.


gee, thanks. i've been on this board since well before registration (with the same handle too) and never been nominated for a primey. i guess that doesn't speak well for the quality of my posts. oh well.
   168. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:48 PM (#4271567)
It does seem like a lot of people at baseball games aren't paying attention (unless it's really close in the late innings). But wasn't it like that in the 70s as well? When I see people reminiscing about going to regular-season games, a lot of it is about how the ballpark was a cheap place to go and hang out, and/or how people were always getting drunk and getting into fights.

It's a good sign that most of the casual fans are young. There are so many tickets available that a lot less people are priced out of going to baseball games than they are from NBA or NFL.
   169. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:48 PM (#4271568)
But that fact explains, to a large if not definitive degree, why baseball's attendance has gone up. It's not the underlying popularity of the sport itself, or the experience of paying attention to it live -- thus Oakland and Tampa -- it's the fact that a lot of people who don't care about baseball go to baseball games now that didn't BITD. Thus, we can't just say, "Attendance higher, popularity higher."


Not really at all. Oakland's popularity is caused by the fact that the owner has bad mouth the team and the stadium, poor marketing is not the same thing as nationwide interest has waned. And Tampa is an expansion team that is a poor market and is still outdrawing many of the teams were, when you point to your sweet spot.

The facts are 1. baseball is drawing more fans. 2. the 12 rank team in attendance is drawing more fans than the 4th rank team fro your sweet spot 3. the lower drawing teams are also drawing better than the majority. No matter how you slice it you cannot deny the facts.

The better ballpark experience drives popularity. The increased competitiveness drives popularity. More teams being in the post season hunt, means more fans in more cities, you don't have a handful of teams with good attendance and a majority with poor attendance, instead you have a majority with good attendance, a couple with poor attendance.

No matter how you look at it, those are the facts.

2012 attendence.
Tm    Attendance Attend/G
                         
PHI      3565718    44021
NYY      3542406    43733
TEX      3460280    42720
SFG      3377371    41696
LAD      3324246    41040
STL      3262109    40273
LAA      3061770    37800
BOS      3043003    37568
DET      3028033    37383
CHC      2882756    35590
MIL      2831385    34955
MIN      2776354    34276
COL      2630458    32475
ATL      2420171    29879
WSN      2370794    29269
CIN      2347251    28978
NYM      2242803    27689
MIA      2219444    27401
ARI      2177617    26884
SDP      2123721    26219
BAL      2102240    25954
TOR      2099663    25922
PIT      2091918    25826
CHW      1965955    24271
KCR      1739859    21480
SEA      1721920    21258
OAK      1679013    20729
HOU      1607733    19849
CLE      1603596    19797
TBR      1559681    19255 


1988 your sweet spot

Tm    Attendance Attend/G
                         
NYM      3055445    38193
MIN      3030672    37416
LAD      2980262    36793
STL      2892799    35714
NYY      2633701    32921
TOR      2595175    32039
BOS      2464851    30430
KCR      2350181    29377
CAL      2340925    28900
OAK      2287335    28239
CHC      2089034    25476
DET      2081162    25693
CIN      2072528    25907
PHI      1990041    24568
HOU      1933505    23870
MIL      1923238    23744
PIT      1866713    23046
SFG      1785297    22041
BAL      1660738    20759
TEX      1581901    19530
SDP      1506896    18604
MON      1478659    18255
CLE      1411610    17427
CHW      1115749    13775
SEA      1022398    12622
ATL       848089    10735 


6 teams with higher attendance than the best team in 1988. Yes there are more teams(by 4) than in that past, 2012 has 8 teams with over 3 mil in attendance, 0 teams with under 1.5 mil in attendance(compared to 5)... it's not a debate.

   170. phredbird Posted: October 15, 2012 at 06:59 PM (#4271573)
If I had to pick a "Golden Age" of baseball, in terms of pure interest in the sport, quality competition among most/all the markets, and quality/variety of play on the field, I'd say around 1978 to 1993 and if forced to narrow it further, I'd say 1988 to 1993


now we know approximately when sugar bear shooting blanks was 12.
   171. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:02 PM (#4271575)
now we know approximately when sugar bear shooting blanks was 12.


The rest of the part that you quoted tells you when he was 12.
If I had to pick a "Golden Age" of baseball, in terms of pure interest in the sport, quality competition among most/all the markets, and quality/variety of play on the field, I'd say around 1978 to 1993 and if forced to narrow it further, I'd say 1988 to 1993 -- years having nothing to do with being a kid as I was 12 a decade-plus before 1988.
   172. phredbird Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:08 PM (#4271576)
my bad, i had to stop reading. you should too, you're wasting your bandwidth.
   173. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:17 PM (#4271581)
Tampa draws way less than the good Astro teams drew to the craptastic Astrodome in the 80s.

Yes, and there are no other differences between the city of Houston and the city of St. Petersburg that could possibly explain this disparity. Nope. None at all.

Anyway, if the change in parks is solely responsible for the increase in attendance, let's look at the teams who've played in the same park since the beginning of the LCS era. Here they are:

Red Sox - Average attendance from 1969-93: 24,868. Average from 1994-2012: 33,490. Difference: +8,622.

Angels - Average from 1969-93: 23,430. Average from 1994-2012: 33,464. Difference: +10,034.

Well, those teams have both played better in the Wild Card era than they did in the "at least the team won SOMETHING" era. But there are a few that haven't:

Dodgers - Average from 1969-93: 34,681. Average from 1994-2012: 41,175. Difference: +6,494. (Declined by 11 points of winning percentage, and haven't won a pennant in the Wild Card era after winning five pennants and two titles in the LCS era.)

Cubs - Average from 1969-93: 20,959. Average from 1994-2012: 35,065. Difference: +14,106. (Declined by 7 points of winning percentage; obviously haven't won a pennant in either period. This year's 101-loss team outdrew the 1984 division champs by over 9,000 fans per game. EDIT: This year's 101-loss team actually outdrew EVERY SINGLE CUB TEAM from the LCS-only era.)

A's (as discussed above) - Average from 1969-93: 17,233. Average from 1994-2012: 20,915. Difference: +3,682.

Those mallparks sure are powerful - they can even draw fans to other stadiums.
   174. BDC Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:22 PM (#4271586)
a mans bastion where you could quietly contemplate suicide as you drink beer and watch a game in peace and quiet

There were a lot of women around, but the rest of this phrase corresponds to my last three nights at the Ballpark :-D
   175. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:22 PM (#4271587)
my bad, i had to stop reading. you should too, you're wasting your bandwidth.


I had quit reading and was going to make a similar 12 year old comment, and went back and caught it.

I'm not sure who is more pigheaded, SBB or Sam. Sbb is at least not an idiot, even if his brain isn't able to properly connect logic circuits.
   176. RMc is a fine piece of cheese Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:25 PM (#4271588)
Back when we were kids, baseball (and everything else) was cool.

Then we got older, and baseball (and everything else) changed.

Now, baseball (and everything else) kinda sucks.

And to make things worse, scads of ignorant young people are enjoying baseball (and everything else), even though we know it's an inferior product.

If only baseball (and everything else) could be the way it was.

And we could be young again.
   177. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:31 PM (#4271595)
If only baseball (and everything else) could be the way it was.

And we could be young again.


This sort of thing is the reason that the Specs Toporcer entry is my favorite chapter in The Glory of Their Times. Toporcer always had bad vision (hence the nickname), but he went more or less completely blind after his playing career ended. Because of that, he obviously wasn't able to watch the players who came after him, but he still listened to him on the radio. And because he was therefore seeing them through the excited eyes of a radio announcer rather than the jaded ones of a former player, he rediscovered the sense of awe that so many of his fellow retirees seem to lose.
   178. cardsfanboy Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:34 PM (#4271599)
Back when we were kids, baseball (and everything else) was cool.

Then we got older, and baseball (and everything else) changed.

Now, baseball (and everything else) kinda sucks.

And to make things worse, scads of ignorant young people are enjoying baseball (and everything else), even though we know it's an inferior product.

If only baseball (and everything else) could be the way it was.

And we could be young again.


I was thinking of something along similar lines. Baseball when I was younger was more enjoyable, but so was Star Wars and so was Battle of the Planets and math and Soccer(Indoor) and it's not like I like them less nowadays(well maybe soccer) but it's that I have so many other interest that I can't dedicate my interest so single purposely. It's the sad part of growing up, but it doesn't really mean you have lost interest it's just that you have to compartmentalize your interests.
   179. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:40 PM (#4271603)

The inability of stat dorks to distinguish predictive analysis from "things that have actually happened in the world" is...tedious.

That's rich, coming from the guy who claims the Cardinals didn't win real championships because they didn't have the best regular season record...
   180. mjs Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:42 PM (#4271606)
Your definition of a mallpark is basically a well designed stadium that it isn't a chore to go to? People aren't paying ticket prices to get the privilege of paying for overpriced food. They are paying ticket prices to go to a game, comfort just makes it a more pleasurable experience.


Yep, from what I understand, mallparks are any new baseball stadium that draws a lot of people (or any stadium that draws a lot of people). To be a true ballpark, you have to have worse attendance, because popularity is down for baseball because of expanded playoffs. Anything contradicting this is just random noise to be ignored.

I do love that the mallpark article pointed out that, GASP... Females are actually showing up at games. Oh, the humanity!

And the anti-Cards rhetoric is pretty hilarious as well.
   181. phredbird Posted: October 15, 2012 at 07:46 PM (#4271611)
I'm not sure who is more pigheaded, SBB or Sam. Sbb is at least not an idiot, even if his brain isn't able to properly connect logic circuits.


oddly enough, i'd put it the other way around. sam facebooks much better than he btfs.

sorry to use those words as verbs, you know what i mean.
   182. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:24 PM (#4271679)
Why don't you explain your disagreement?


Because I don't really consider you worth the effort.
   183. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:29 PM (#4271691)
That's rich, coming from the guy who claims the Cardinals didn't win real championships because they didn't have the best regular season record...


I never claimed the Cards didn't win the tournament games. I merely scare-quoted "championship' to show my derision for the "skill" required to do as much. Also, lick my sack.
   184. RMc is a fine piece of cheese Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:39 PM (#4271711)
Also, lick my sack.

Boy, if that doesn't clinch an argument, nothing does!
   185. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:43 PM (#4271724)
Boy, if that doesn't clinch an argument, nothing does!


I have mad debating skills. I was in debate club and everything.
   186. GuyM Posted: October 15, 2012 at 08:54 PM (#4271744)
Why don't you explain your disagreement?
Because I don't really consider you worth the effort.

Wow. Ignorant, stupid, and lazy. Impressive.
   187. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: October 15, 2012 at 09:00 PM (#4271759)
Impressive


It only gets better the closer you get, baby.
   188. Ben V-L Posted: October 16, 2012 at 03:30 AM (#4272212)
The Cards-hating is fine. Part of fandom to cherish these irrational things. And the TLR hating is fine too, since it's pretty rational.

But the widely accepted premise on this thread that the Cardinals have a knack for above average luck, or have a clever plan for underachieving in the regular season, is alarming! Among a select group of people who are supposed to understand numbers! This is exactly what led to the financial crisis. Well, that and a bunch of greed.

Sure, the Cards were lucky to have the Braves collapse last year (and they were lucky to finally have Allen Craig and David Freese healthy). So let's go back to ancient history: 2010. The Cardinals again were again cleverly a little above .500 and watched the postseason from home. Digging even further back into the archives: 2009, the lucky Cardinals rode their division championship into the playoffs and were shut down 3-0 by the Dodgers. 2008: they were again cleverly a little above .500 and finished 4th in the weak-ass central division. In 2007 it looks like they hadn't figured out the secret to success was to be a little ABOVE .500. In 2006, they were genuinely lucky. And in 2005 they owned the best record in baseball, the only 100-win team, and they were taken out by the Houston Astros.

   189. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: October 16, 2012 at 07:04 AM (#4272227)
But the widely accepted premise on this thread that the Cardinals have a knack for above average luck, or have a clever plan for underachieving in the regular season, is alarming! Among a select group of people who are supposed to understand numbers! This is exactly what led to the financial crisis. Well, that and a bunch of greed.

Or, you could look at more than an 8-year sample. If you look at the entire history of the World Series, the Cardinals have won just over three more of them than you'd expect based on their playoff appearances. That's the second-most among the 30 franchises, trailing only (of course) the Yankees.
   190. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 16, 2012 at 07:39 AM (#4272233)
it's the fact that a lot of people who don't care about baseball go to baseball games now that didn't BITD. Thus, we can't just say, "Attendance higher, popularity higher."


Isn't that a textbook example of an increase in popularity? Baseball has attracted a lot of new fans using creative marketing.

Or are you arguing that in the old days, baseball was so popular nobody went to the ballparks anymore, they were too crowded?
   191. bunyon Posted: October 16, 2012 at 08:26 AM (#4272242)
I hereby propose that the day leading up to Game 3 we spend again in a long thread about how the Cards catch all the breaks and get all the calls.



Oh, and the rule ought to be that you can't make contact with the infielder past the bag. I'd expect Holliday shouldn't dig in his first AB against the Giants next spring.
   192. Bitter Mouse Posted: October 16, 2012 at 08:34 AM (#4272245)
What changed is that I decided that "sports hate" is stupid.


This is the craziest thing I have read in this thread (including SBB relentlessly stating you can not compare old and new ballparks for attendence, while using TV ratings decline as a sure sign of decreased interest - hey SBB the media landscape has changed more than the ballparks have).

Sports hate is fun. Booing AJ Pierogi and Captain Dreamboat is fun. I was not actually happy when the Captain hurt his ankle, but I was sports hate happy. As a human I wish nothing but the best for Mr. Jeter, as a Yankee Icon he is the object of scorn. it is not personal and is not real, but it helps give a interest in games and someone to cheer for or against.

And both SBB and Sam have their moments. Sam is more clearly an internet construct and on those terms is entertaining, but SBB has his moments.

I have a very mild sports hate for the Cards. I am a mild Cubs fan (from my time in Chicago) and dislike TLR, but thatis about as far as it goes. My baseball sports hate is reserved for the Yankee's and Dodgers, though the Red Sox are really trying to evoke it and gthe Braves are fairly aweful as well.
   193. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 16, 2012 at 08:49 AM (#4272250)
Isn't that a textbook example of an increase in popularity? Baseball has attracted a lot of new fans using creative marketing.

Not in my eyes. More people going to the property where baseball is played to do things other than watch baseball does not equal an increase in popularity.

And I'm still confused about Oakland and Tampa -- the only non-mallpark, non-icon stadiums in baseball. How is baseball in Oakland "more popular than ever" when attendance is down ca. 40% from its peak? Particularly when, as is likely, fewer people in the A's market watch the postseason games on TV than in the late 80s/early 90s?

How is baseball in Tampa "popular" at all?
   194. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: October 16, 2012 at 09:19 AM (#4272252)

Not in my eyes. More people going to the property where baseball is played to do things other than watch baseball does not equal an increase in popularity.


Ah, the 'no true Scotsman' fallacy. They go to ballparks, pay admission, watch the game, cheer the players, but they aren't true fans!
   195. JJ1986 Posted: October 16, 2012 at 09:19 AM (#4272253)
Oakland and Tampa -- the only non-mallpark, non-icon stadiums in baseball.


Angels Stadium?
   196. bunyon Posted: October 16, 2012 at 09:25 AM (#4272258)
I haven't been to Camden Yards in a long time - is it a mallpark? It's certainly comfortable, but I don't recall any frills.

Same with the Nats park.
   197. BDC Posted: October 16, 2012 at 09:27 AM (#4272260)
Well, I guess I have to revise my theory about Chris Carpenter being invincible in the playoffs.
   198. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 16, 2012 at 09:41 AM (#4272270)
Angels Stadium?

Never been there. It's been renovated a bunch, likely converted from ballpark to mallpark -- that's, you know, kind of the point of the renovations. The Angels drew 2.8M plus to it when it was a concrete circle, multi-purpose "monstrosity." Looks like they averaged 2.4-2.5 M in the 80s.
   199. mjs Posted: October 16, 2012 at 10:07 AM (#4272288)
I haven't been to Camden Yards in a long time - is it a mallpark? It's certainly comfortable, but I don't recall any frills.

Same with the Nats park.


If it draws more people and is anything more than a baseball field, seats, and maybe (can't be sure) one concession stand, mallpark
   200. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: October 16, 2012 at 10:19 AM (#4272296)
If it draws more people and is anything more than a baseball field, seats, and maybe (can't be sure) one concession stand, mallpark

Drawing more people isn't a prerequisite. For example, the Orioles drew ca. 350,000 more fans to multipurpose, circular Memorial Stadium in 1990 and 1991 than to mallpark Camden Yards in 2012 -- and for worse teams.
Page 2 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
robneyer
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCalcaterra: So, if you’re not a fan of the Royals or Giants, who ya got?
(82 - 10:41pm, Oct 20)
Last: A triple short of the cycle

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8366 - 10:29pm, Oct 20)
Last: steagles

NewsblogBrisbee: The 5 worst commercials of the MLB postseason
(133 - 10:26pm, Oct 20)
Last: zonk

NewsblogFan Returns Home Run Ball to Ishikawa; Receives World Series tickets
(31 - 10:23pm, Oct 20)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

NewsblogHitting coaches blamed for lack of offense - Sports - The Boston Globe
(15 - 10:19pm, Oct 20)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogCould the Yankees ever be Royals? Young and athletic K.C. is everything that Bombers are not - NY Daily News
(28 - 10:18pm, Oct 20)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(2765 - 9:39pm, Oct 20)
Last: Guapo

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(11 - 9:38pm, Oct 20)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogSielski: A friend fights for ex-Phillie Dick Allen's Hall of Fame induction
(66 - 9:15pm, Oct 20)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogPitch from Zito helped sell Hudson on Giants | MLB.com
(6 - 9:15pm, Oct 20)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogWhy Royals great Frank White no longer associates with the team whose stadium he built - Yahoo Sports
(19 - 9:06pm, Oct 20)
Last: A New Leaf (Black Hawk Reign of Terror)

NewsblogAngell: Gigantic
(38 - 8:22pm, Oct 20)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(272 - 7:27pm, Oct 20)
Last: andrewberg

NewsblogMorosi: Could Cain’s story make baseball king of sports world again?
(97 - 6:24pm, Oct 20)
Last: BDC

NewsblogESPN: Brian Roberts retires
(22 - 6:19pm, Oct 20)
Last: Captain Supporter

Page rendered in 1.0398 seconds
53 querie(s) executed