As it turned out, find the Angels decided to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the game I wrote about yesterday by playing a 15-inning game with the Cubs.
They used five pitchers. The Cubs used eight.
Posts that don’t quite fit into any other categories.
As it turned out, find the Angels decided to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the game I wrote about yesterday by playing a 15-inning game with the Cubs.
They used five pitchers. The Cubs used eight.
Hmm, Levi and I should have coordinated our vacations so we didn’t have weeks where only one of us has to carry the blog load.
Anyway, potential guideline for the baseball trip: no drinking “beer by the yard,” even if it’s really only 18 inches, because once you’ve consumed one of those things, it’s pretty hard to get up the next morning and drive somewhere. Trust me.
I meant to check out for Levi what the current odds were on the Cards winning the World Series, but I was too busy collecting my winnings on a certain non-baseball bet I placed at the sports book on Monday afternoon.
Steve: So did you drink a “yard” or a “half yard?” A yard is about equivalent to 40oz of beer. After sitting by the “beers of the world” stand at Comiskey the other night and paying $5.50 for 16oz PBR, I think the yard of beer is your most economical beer selection at the ballpark. I don’t endorse you drinking a yard of beer a day becuase I wonder what that would do to your diet of Hostess Baseballs. It could get ugly.
Jim: I drank a full yard (of Dos Equis amber, this being a Mexican restaurant, which was primarily pushing margaritas by the yard, but you could get any drink that way). It was $13.95, but that’s Vegas hotel pricing, not ballpark pricing.
Stacey and I are off on vacation with her family for a week, starting tomorrow. So I will be away from the Internet (Unless one of Stacey’s sisters has one of those magic internet phone-watch-missile-defense-system-thingies, which would probably terrify me so much that I couldn’t use it even if I wanted to do so.) and not posting to BRPA2004.
In my absence, I hope Jim will at least impersonate me for a post or two. It’s not like it’s that hard. You mention Johnny Damon, lament a Cardinals loss or cheer a Cardinals victory.
Or you could post something about Raul Mondesi—whose nickname is “The Buffalo”— and Operation Shutdown: The Sequel, which he pulled in Pittsburgh, the home of the original, unmatchable Operation Shutdown.
And you could link to this silly picture, from the game where Mondesi, now an Angel, tore his quadriceps.
There. Now Jim will be able to impersonate me with ease. See you all when we return.
thatbob: I have no idea what you’re talking about.
1) Damon claims in this article that it took him only three weeks to grow the beard. But then he goes on to say that he will have it back in about ten days. Maybe that means he’s getting better with practice?
2) According to an article Stacey found, which I can’t find right now, Damon’s been shaving since he was six. That’s what she says.
3) And just to leave you all warm and fuzzy, here are Damon’s reasons for choosing tutoring program at the Boston Public Library and a city program, ReadBoston, as the beneficiaries of his charitable act:
“I didn’t read well when I was young,” said Damon. “They help kids do that. My parents were always working. I never had help on my homework, so it just related a lot with my life and me growing up. I think it just helps out everybody. It brings awareness and hopefully, they can get a lot more donations and help out a lot more kids, and that’s what Boston’s about. We have all these colleges here. We want to try to make each kid smart enough to go to these colleges.
“We’re going to have even more ‘smahtah’ kids here in Boston.”
4) In today’s non-Damon note, I noticed something interesting that recent Cardinals call-up the Third Molina was doing last night while catching Chris Carpenter. In the late innings, as Carpenter tired and his pitches started to float up a bit, Molina began dropping his target all the way to the dirt. He’d set up, then hunker down and more or less lay the open glove in the dirt. The tactic seemed to work: Carpenter started aiming at the glove, and the pitches, when they didn’t drop as much as they should have, ended up around the knees rather than around the belt. Does anyone know if this is a trick that Jose Molina or Bengie Molina uses?
Bengie Molina: I use that trick all the time. I also have the picture of a fly painted on the inside of my mitt, which the pitcher attempts to squash. It seems to help, unless a real fly lands on the end of the bat.
Levi: The real question, though, is how the hell a family produces three major leaguers at one position?
Were there no pitcher or shortstop genes in their family? Or did those all go to the gals?
sandor: Smart idea, Bengie. Been to Amsterdam lately?
Secho: What we do know is that Mr. and Mrs. Molina were pretty quick to get their groove back on after Bengie was born. His birthday is July 20, 1974, while Jose’s is June 3, 1975. So they are, at this moment, both 29 years old, and not twins. So I guess itt’s not too surprising that they share common talents and interests, though you would think one of them would’ve been pitching to the other one all those years.
Who were the last set of 3 brothers to play major league ball simultaneously? The Alous?
Levi: I think it’s the Alous. The only other trios I can come up with off the top of my head are the DiMaggios and the Boyers. I know there have been at least a couple more.
I really like what I’ve seen of The Third Molina so far, although he does still look not quite ready for a full-time job in the majors.
stacey: did the third benes brother never make it out of the minors? they were all pitchers, i believe. maybe they grew up down the street from the molinas.
Luke: Pat Hughes and Dave Otto were discussing this during last night’s game — Ron Santo was taking the series off, so there was much more talk about actual baseball and much less about hairpieces, sweaters and funny names — and they said there have been 19 sets of brothers, the most recent being Jose, Hector and Tommy in 1977. Here’s a complete list.
Cluke: And I think it goes without saying that the awards for best names go to Clete, Cloynd and Ken Boyer.
Cloyd!
In the early balloting for the starting outfield for the American League All-Star team, Baseball-Related Program Activities 2004 favorite Johnny Damon is a strong third.
Now, much as I hate to admit it, Johnny Damon is definitely not the third-best outfielder in the American League.
While he was on the All-Star team in 2002, he has never come close to being voted to a starting berth. And it’s not like he’s off to an extremely good start this season. His .282/383./400 line is perfectly acceptable, but it’s not like he’s setting the world on fire.
Not with his bat, that is. We all know why Johnny Damon might make the All-Star team: Who doesn’t want to have the coolest-looking player in baseball representing the American League at baseball’s coolest position? Well, aside from a few silly Yankees fans, that is. Even without the beard, he deserves the starting nod.
Internet voting is allowed. Vote early and often, and this might be the best All-Star game since the one Bud Selig ruined–which happens to be the one in which Johnny Damon went 1-3.
maura: you can only vote up to 25 times! so don’t vote too often, there.
Jim: I punched out a lot of all-star ballots for Johnny Damon, among others, at the Devil Rays-Rangers game (because my father dumped a bunch of them in my lap, and there was nothing else to do). No wonder he’s running third!
Steve: this is only partially related but on Wed night, Vladimir Guerrero (leading AL outfield vote getter) had 9 RBI in a game. I looked around a bit for the single game record to no avail. Jim? Levi?
Jim: According to the chart that was in Thursday’s L.A. Times, the record is 12, held by both Jim Bottomley of the Cardinals (who did it on September 16, 1924) and Mark Whiten of the Cardinals (September 7, 1993). The A.L. record is 11, held by Tony Lazzeri of the Yankees (May 24, 1936).
Levi: I was listening to the Mark Whiten game. It was something.
His feat is impressive because he drove in all 12 on home runs. Four of them.
Secho: I was thinking Whiten was probably the worst player ever to hit 4 HRs in a game (and this is a category that includes Mike Cameron); despite hitting 25 homers and driving in 99 in 1993, Whiten had only a .746 OPS. How do you drive in 99 while slugging .423? Hell, even Kevin Elster slugged .462 when he inexplicably drove in 99 runs. Okay, Johnny Damon’s only slugging .416 with 31 RBI, but I’ll grow a mullet if he’s sitting at 100 RBI with his current line at the end of the season.
Anyway, I thought Whiten was the worst 4-homer player unil I stumbled upon Pat Seerey, who did it for the White Sox in 1948. He was a career .224 hitter who only played 4 games in 1949 before being cut and never played again. This after leading the Sox with 18 homers and 64 RBI in 1948. Even Seerey had a .768 OPS that season, though, so I may be switching my vote back to Whiten.
Levi: Whiten really was a bad hitter, a mistake hitter who would flash such impressive power on those few bad pitches he hammered that he’d have you scratching your head.
Whiten somehow only hit 13 doubles in 1993, which goes a long way (with his lousy batting average) to explaining his low slugging percentage. And the RBI were (Here’s where I wish Dan Rivkin was reading this blog regularly), I’m guessing, about 40% Gregg Jeffries (.342/.408/.485), 20% Ray Lankford (.238/.366./.346), 20% Bernard Gilkey (.305/.370/.481). God knows where the other 20% came from.
Oh, and Jim Bottomley was known as Sunny Jim Bottomley.
The Dodgers have dropped their mascot plans. They say they’re still looking at other options to improve the entertainment experience at Dodger Stadium.
Two recent pieces of news from the Los Angeles Dodgers: their organist Nancy Bea Hefley is playing a lot less than she used to, and they’re considering adding a mascot (no link available, but there was a story in today’s L.A. Times that, if today were April 1 and not June 1, I would have thought was fake).
I’m wondering if new Dodgers owner Frank McCourt doesn’t have some kind of “Producers”-style scam going on that depends on low attendance at Dodger Stadium. Raising ticket prices would have been too obvious, so he raised parking prices and concession stand prices, but that didn’t work too well, because people still keep showing up to the games. There were no spectacular free agent signings in the off-season, just a troublemaker acquired at the last minute. Yet the Dodgers are doing pretty well, so people still keep showing up to the games. Perhaps when the no-organ-plus-annoying-mascot plan doesn’t work, McCourt will make every night Free Beach Ball Night, in which every fan will get a free pre-inflated beach ball and will be encouraged to bat it around in the stands throughout the game. Oh, wait a second…
By the way, the Major League Baseball organist situation isn’t quite as dire as the Seattle Times column makes it out to be. Their list of organists is incomplete. For example, the Tampa Bay Devil Rays have a live organist, believe it or not, to name one team they didn’t mention. His booth is next to, but not inside, the press box, and I was just a few sections over from it at the game last month. I only realized afterwards that I should have gone over there to see if he took requests.
Levi: Hey, don’t knock Milton Bradley.
As he said last year when sent down by Cleveland, “There seems to be one set of rules for Milton Bradley, and another set for everybody else.”
thatbob: Oh, see, I have a deep and profound love for annoying mascots that I’m surprised you don’t share, Jim. But at least if they get a Trolley Dodger, they’ll have to get a trolley, no? Wouldn’t that make you happy! LA hasn’t had one of those since, what, the 1940s?
I hope it’s a big pink and green trolley made of balloons and glitter that runs back and forth across the backfield. Isn’t that the kind you like?
Jason: Bernie Brewer was never annoying.
Levi: If the Dodgers get a mascot, who’s next? A big, stinky Red Sock? A plastered Trixie named Cubbina?
We can only hope.
Jim: The Red Sox have a mascot: Wally the Green Monster.
With hit after hit after hit over the last week, Albert Pujols appears to be back, having shaken the slump that had dogged him all season. He’s now got an on-base-percentage of .404 and a slugging percentage of .612, very close to his career numbers. Kind of out of nowhere, he’s now leading the league in home runs, too. And you can tell just by watching him on TV that he’s hitting like the Albert Pujols we’re used to seeing, no longer getting off-balance and out on his front foot.
What’s funny about it is that, according to Buck Martinez on ESPN yesterday, Albert broke out of his slump when his wife, Deirdre, pointed out to him while they were watching tapes of his at-bats that he had spread his stance out too much. She talked to Albert about it, and also to hitting coach Mitchell Page. Now, I have always heard that the general philosophy of most hitting coaches is to use whatever works (Walt Hriniak and Charlie Lau excepted), but don’t you think that would be a bit irksome, to have a player’s wife come tell you what to look out for? Even if she’s right–and even if you hadn’t noticed the problem yourself, your pride would surely suffer a bit.
This led Bob and me to a discussion of whether maybe Deirdre is as a good a hitter as Albert, but she stays home with the kids because it’s good for a kid to have a parent at home. Bob suggested that maybe she’s Polly Ann to Albert’s John Henry. Let’s just hope that Albert never has to test himself against an electronic hitting machine.
Although it sure would be fun to hear the fans scream, “The upper deck’s caving in!”, and Albert respond, not losing a beat, “That ain’t nothing but my bat sucking wind,” as he drives another ball over the Arch.
Toby: It doesn’t really have anything to do with Pujols, but happy birthday, Levi.
thatbob: Pujols is probably worth the ink, don’t get me wrong. But in the coming years, try to be careful not to fall into a Bob Greene or Bob Costas wanting-to-slobber-all-over-Michael Jordan’s-(well, let me try to keep this family related)-NBA-championship-rings kind-of relationship. It’s a fine line to walk, I know, but as a married man, it’s your job to walk it.
Jason: I’d like to see what Mrs. Jose Lima has to say about this.
Actually, I just like to see Mrs. Lima.
Levi: Well, Pujols did go 5-5 last night with two doubles and a home run, and he cured cancer during the seventh-inning stretch, but your point is taken, Bob. I won’t mention it.
Oh, and it’s not ink: it’s bytes.
Levi: And thanks, Toby. Back in the day when you could buy ten or twelve tickets to a Cubs night game without planning very far ahead, I would have had a birthday party at the ballpark, and brought a cake. But this year, we just had some people over for barbecue Monday and watched the game on TV last night.
It was a pleasant birthday.
I’ve been thinking a little more about the role one’s behavior at baseball games could play in the handing down of eternal punishment or reward. It’s a complex issue.
For example: Jeffrey Maier. You remember him. He’s the twelve-year-old kid who helped win Game 1 of the 1996 ALCS for the Yankees by reaching over the fence and grabbing what would likely have been a flyout by Derek Jeter, turning it into a home run.
Now, my view on fan interference is this: feel free to interfere with a ball in play, but be sure of what you’re doing before you stick that hand or glove out there. If you’re rooting for the home team from the front row down the line, and the ball hit by the opponent is headed for the corner, a definite triple, feel free to lean over the fence and turn the ball into an automatic double. What I don’t like to see is the fan who, wrapped up in his ignorant desire for a batted ball, turns his own team’s triple into a double. It’s all about thinking in advance. I guarantee that Scott Rolen, before each play, thinks through what he’ll do in any situation. Is it too much to ask fans sitting at field level to do the same?
So Jeffrey Maier clearly fits into the category of righteous interference: he saw that Tony Tarasco was probably going to catch the ball. He may not have been sure that it would be ruled a home run if he caught it, but the consequence of not catching it was camped out beneath him. So grabbing it, despite the fact that he was taking a chance of being thrown out of a playoff game, was clearly the right thing to do.
But the situation gets more complex. After all, the team Mr. Maier was supporting with his action was the Yankees. And I like to think–Damn Yankees to the contrary–the gods know the Yankees are evil. What–you think the gods aren’t as smart as a 6-year-old Sox fan? No, the gods definitely know the Yanks are evil. I think they allow the Yankees their success both as a trial to the rest of us, a test of our faith in our own teams, and as a kind of spiritual flypaper. Anyone foolish enough to fall prey to the easy seductions of the World Series trophies and the black-and-white pinstripes reveals a weakness sure to be noted by the gods.
So given that: was Jeffrey Maier’s action a good action, in a philosophical sense? Is it likely to have added to the credit side of his spiritual ledger, or did it weigh down the debit?
See why the Old Testament God was so cranky? It’s complex. I don’t blame him for just sending plagues all the damn time rather than thinking about this kind of thing.
P.S. Added later
To clarify a bit the concept of “spiritual flypaper”: I think of it kind of like the situation in Nina Simone’s “Sinnerman”: the sinnerman runs to the rock, and it can’t hide him, then he runs to the river, and it’s bleeding, and he runs to the sea to find it boiling, then he runs to the lord, who tells him to go to the devil.
The devil is waiting. He’s always waiting. I picture him in a nicely tailored blue houndstooth smoking jacket, a circle of flattened cigarette butts around his spats a little indication of how long he’s been waiting, knowing that the sinnerman would show up sooner or later.
Like the Yankees. They’re content to wait until your team blows a 13-game lead or goes twelve years without a winning season or your cast-off first baseman rediscovers his youth in the very place Ponce de Leon came up empty.
Steve: So, according to this logic the Cubs are Isaac and Bartman is Abraham–only God decided not to intervene at the last minute.
Luke: >I don’t blame him for just sending plagues all the damn time rather
>than thinking about this kind of thing.
How do you think we ended up with the wild card, green-screen ads and the Devil Rays? We also ended up with, for a time, Johnny Damon’s hair, but if God truly loved us, the shaving cream would have turned to wine when it touched his face.
Other than a handful of personalities and talents who have made fandom worthwhile — the Marks Grace, the Alberts Pujols, the Rickeys Henderson, the Antonios Alfonseca — have there been any developments in the past 30 years to suggest God’s grace? Streaming broadcasts, maybe, but one has to pay for them (that the Bill of Rights fails to mention our right to free baseball audio merely proves our forefathers’ lack of foresight). All other changes to the game — retractable domes, sponsored first pitches and lineup changes, elbow pads — seem to be proof of God’s retributive side.
Levi: So, Luke, you’re saying that Selig is Satan?
Luke, hanger-on: I figured it went without saying, but just in case, I’ll say it: Bud Selig is Satan.
“Allan H Bud Selig,” after all, anagrams to “Hell! Bad! Sin! Luga!”
(Luga being the eskimo word for “menace to a great sport.”)
I just learned from King Kaufman’s Salon column that SABR member Doug Pappas died last week at age 43 of heat prostration while hiking.
Doug Pappas wasn’t well known outside the SABR community, but he was a hell of a baseball fan. He was a Manhattan lawyer who seemed to spend all his free time researching and writing on the business side of baseball. He did amazing research, wrote clearly, and, because of the nature of Bud Selig’s administration, he spent a lot of his time calling Bud Selig a liar, then backing it up. Just about any time in the last four years that you’ve heard me railing about Selig, it’s been Doug Pappas’s research I’ve been spouting. In my dream where I told off Selig for an hour in my kitchen, I might as well have had Pappas on my shoulder as my little good angel, feeding my lines.
As King Kaufmann points out, another of Pappas’s regular targets was that silly Team Fan Cost Index thing that gets ginned up and sent to the media every spring, proving that it costs something like $36,250 to take a family of four to a game. Pappas would always do what Major League Baseball, if it were able to see beyond the next labor battle, should have done: he’d point out that this silly figure is based on a family buying four mid-range tickets, two ball caps, two beers, four sodas, four hot dogs, some pretzels, etc., but is passed off as the “average” cost for a family to attend a game. You might as well throw the cost of their SUV and parking ticket into the mix. The Team Fan Cost Index tells you very little about what a family might be able to go to a game for; all it does is (I assume) scare off a few middle class families every year when they see the story in their paper with the $36,250 figure in the first sentence. Every year, Pappas reminded anyone he could what useless junk that number is.
His site gives an idea of what he was up to. I loved his work, if only because I was glad that someone was so dedicated to the game. I love baseball, but I will always spend too much time on other areas to be truly knowledgeable, so I greatly appreciate those who are willing to spend their time helping me to better understand the game. Doug Pappas somehow made the time, and he made good use of it.
King Kaufman describes well what we’ve lost: “Those of us who love baseball had a watchdog in Pappas, someone to let us know about the damage being done to the game by those running it. I hope someone with anything like his smarts, insight and writing ability can take over that role, but that’s asking a lot. He’ll be sorely missed.”
Steve: Levi,
Sometimes I think I am being a gadfly on this site but apart from that I just wanted you and Jim to know that I enjoy this blog immensely.
So, to this average ticket price thing. The average price just gives someone a “ballpark” figure of what it costs to go to the game. Below I’ve compiled the “low-cost” index for the Chicago teams but more on that later. First, I think it’s telling that they do use the average. I think the point of this exercise is that team X is “family friendly” compared to team Y. An individual or a family can certainly go to the park more cheaply than the average but of course the average implies that a cheaper as well as a more expensive possibility exists. There is a social construction in this figure whether you, as a childless man, want to buy into that or not. In short, this figure is inclusive of families and the middle class. If you did a cheap index you would have to keep reducing it to its bare essentials. You would end up with one person, eating no food, sitting in the worst seats in the house. The index is not trying to figure out the cost to a single, stogie chomping scorecard keeping retiree, it’s the cost of a family going to the game instead of going to Blockbuster, the movie theater or Chuck E Cheese.
Based on my informal research, you see a hell of a lot more families at Comiskey (if you see people there) than you do at Wrigley because its more family friendly but also more affordable. I see in one of your other posts that you are bemoaning the fact that Wrigley is a meat-market. The ticket charge there is essentially a cover charge. I will admit that a lot of bad parenting goes on but when you take the kids out of the house to a game who wants to be a taskmaster? So, if you buy one kid a program you have to buy the other one a program. When kids (and adults) go to the park they want souvenirs. Obviously you don’t have to buy your kids jack squat at the park but I think most people would like to think that they would buy their kids something besides food. If not a hat then a pennant or a “thunder-stick” or some other BS. If you’re middle class you probably aren’t taking the kids on the el so you have to drive and so on and so on. The point of this is that costs a lot to go to the park whether you do it on the cheap or not. If you want to determine how much it costs to take a family to the park it would be silly to simply take the cost of the four cheapest tickets, no food, etc. People consume things at the ballpark and that needs to be taken into consideration. Still as an informal study I’ve tried to mirror the average for Chicago teams by following the same rubric but with more reasonable expenses.
Cubs
Ticket Price $14 each (but you can only go to three day games in Aug or any game in Sept or Oct — another reason the average is telling)
Four Sodas (no beer) $2.50 each
Four Hot dogs: $2.75 each
No program
Two moderate souvenirs: $12 each
Public transport $1.75 x eight (four round trips)
Total cost $115
Sox
Ticket price $6each (but must attend one of 17 half price dates on a mon or tue)
Four Soda: $2.25
Four Hot Dogs: $2.75
No program
Two moderate souvenirs: $12 each
Public transport $1.75 x eight (four round trips)
Total: $82 (that’s good value)
You could bring food from home and do this more cheaply but if someone is doing that you are either a cheap ass or a fat ass because you need more food than you can afford at the park. Good luck sitting though nine innings without buying anything at the park. As to ticket prices, if you want to take your kids to fireworks night or a weekend or a game during the summer at Wrigley this is blown out of the water. Again, this makes the average more telling than the baseline.
What about the “Baseball-related” itinerary? I would be very interested the average cost of this trip. What if you multiply your ballpark individual expense by four?
Levi: I think your analysis is correct, Steve, but you’ll notice that without truly skimping–i.e., the kids won’t be leaving the ballpark unhappy, because they’ve been fed and they’ve gotten some souvenirs–you’ve gotten a cost for the family drastically lower than our friends at Team Marketing Report. Their cost for the Cubs? $194.31. For the Sox? $160.23. All you did was do what any family on a budget would do: you looked for cheap seats. Period. TMR’s use of the average ticket price is wrong because 1) the most expensive tickets both aren’t available to the average budget-conscious family in the first place (They’re held by season-ticket holders or scalpers, for the most part.) _and_ they’re not of interest to the average budget-conscious family. A better plan would be to use the cost of the cheapest non-bleacher seat, because that’s really what the family that has to count dollars will look at. You can even scrap the idea of looking for budget dates–although at Comiskey that would be silly, since _everybody_ looks at the two budget days*–and you’d still end up with a price much lower than TMR’s.
Second, a casual fan doesn’t buy a scorecard or program. Period.
Third, and this is my main complaint about this index: MLB should every year loudly refute this shit. Sure, they don’t want to encourage people to bring their own food, and they don’t want to mention that souvenirs are expensive, but there is absolutely no reason for them not to, every time this report comes out, mount a PR offensive about how cheap the cheap seats are, how great the views are in these new stadiums even from the cheap seats, what a great time kids have at the ballpark, and how goddamn expensive the movies are, let alone the NBA and NFL. The idea is to convince people that they can afford to get in the door. MLB knows that once they’re there, they’ll buy stuff, because that’s what people do, and that’s good for MLB. MLB sure as hell shouldn’t let some outside group determine what people think it wil cost them to go to a ballgame. Yet every year, they not only let this story get out, but they almost encourage it, because they’re always looking at any chance they can to say that players make too much money. And that’s because the people who run MLB are shortsighted liars, for the most part.
The idea of keeping a running total of ballpark expenses for the trip is a fun one. I’ll confer with Jim.
*The Sox tickets are way overpriced on non-budget days because the lease on Comiskey Park calls for the Sox to pay rent only in years in which they sell more than (I’m going to make up a number here, but that’s not really important to the story) 1.5 million full-priced tickets. If I remember right, they’ve only paid rent once, in 2001 (?), primarily because they sell so many tickets at half price or through group sales or at a discount of some sort. And that’s why they set their prices so high, because the marginal gain they would get from lowering them appears, to them, to be less than the gain from not paying rent. It’s a silly, shortsighted strategy, of course, because getting a fan in the door is worth almost any cost in the long term. But again, they’re MLB owners, so expecting the long view is just about futile.
Jim: Yes, I am definitely going to keep careful track of expenditures on the trip, if for no other reason than to make sure that Levi and the hangers-on pay their fair share for the hotel rooms and the rental car. So far, the only expenditure is that we’ve bought tickets for both the Red Sox and the Phillies. Both were $20, which is the second-cheapest seat you can get at Fenway Park (they have a very small amount of $12 seats), and the third-cheapest seat at Citizens Bank Park (they also have $15 and $18 seats). Actually, I’ve also paid for my plane ticket to Chicago already, but that’s not relevant to this discussion.
To compare Chicago prices to southern California: both the Angels and Dodgers have a “family pack” for Wednesday and Sunday games, which includes four upper-deck seats, four hot dogs, and four sodas. The Dodgers’ deal is $48 and also includes parking, and the Angels’ deal is $39 without parking. Adding $24 in souvenirs to use Steve’s matrix, they both come out to a little over $70. Not bad. (Actually, what the Angels’ deal does include is $8 in game tokens for the pitching machines/hitting machines/whatever it is they have in the “interactive baseball-style game” area at Angel Stadium. So if that will pacify the kids enough that they don’t need souvenirs, that really cuts the cost down.)
Steve: Okay, I think we can agree to agree. MLB should do a lot more to make themselves family friendly. Alas, it is clear they have given this terrain over to the minor leagues and are instead concerned with luxury suites and leather vibrating chairs right behind home plate. I think that probably gets to the core of why they don’t try to squash the “average ticket” thing. They don’t want to do anything to alter the perceived value of their sport. If they advertise how cheap or inexpensive their games can be, perhaps they fear that people will think of them as a lesser product. I think it’s interesting the Red Sox and the Cubs are the two highest priced teams while the Expos are the lowest. Right there you see the difference between the Mercedes and the Kia. If a Mercedes cost as much as a Kia it would lose a lot of its luster, no? Baseball makes a hell of a lot more money off the luxury suites than the upper deck reserved so why do anything to advertise how cheap a game when you risk alienating people who are paying a far higher premium to see it?
thatbob: I can’t help but notice that Levi’s argument reflects upon his larger crusade against the abuse of the arithmetical average in describing American culture and economics.