Stuff that doesn't get enough press
(Especially for Diamondhacks!)
I (along with many others I'm sure) received a very nice letter from Derrick Hall yesterday, thanking me for my support as a season-ticket holder--along with $150 worth of concessions vouchers "to be used at the final 15 home games with no strings attached--just a thank you." A very cool gesture.
Also I think what the front office has done with their pledge to donate $5 from every ticket sold to the United Way for the rest of the season is a very nice gesture and a great way to support the community. As someone who is involved in a charity that receives funding from the United Way, I can say first hand how much effect donations like this have on the community.
This front office is trying to do some good things--stuff you don't read about enough.
0 recs |
63 comments
Comments
Good to hear
Of course, you'll always have someone griping that they don't do more. It's the nature of the beast.
by cavscout on Aug 31, 2007 2:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
My biggest concern about
If it's new money, I dont have a gripe with it - some might argue that a ballclub tying "charity" directly to ticket sales is intrinsically crass (ie if it's about helping others, why not just donate the money with no strings attached like most ballclubs'UW donations - or is little Misty going to be denied her ventilator if we dont reach some sales quota?). If it's not new money however, essentially an accounting gimmick to mislead the philanthropic public into buying tix under false pretenses, then that ought to be exposed.
Regarding Hall's letter, if I had 5 grand invested in season tickets, some coupons for overpriced junk dangled my way around renewal time probably wouldnt inspire an online paean to the FO, but that's just me :-) As long as enough folks feel it's a "very cool gesture" though, it's a sensible marketing strategy, which I have no problem with. I just think it's worth noting that that's all it is - it has nothing to do with "being nice".
Neither do I share your apparent frustration that Dbacks charitable efforts somehow dont get enough press. Charitable affiliations are mentioned on every single gamecast and extended feel good stories are advertised regularly (some might say "endlessly") on Dbacks' magazine shows and during selected games. Is there another org in town (ie bank, law firm, corp) whose donations get more press than the Dbacks? Maybe, but I cant think of one of the top of my head.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 1, 2007 12:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Wow....
by DbacksSkins on Sep 1, 2007 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hacks, I'll give you....
However, I must disagree with your biting critique of the D'backs' charity effort. Let us consider your possibility: that the Diamondbacks had already budgeted this chunk of cash to go to the United Way.
There are two very simple responses.
- So what? The money goes to charity.
- So what? Why does it matter? The money goes to charity.
by DbacksSkins on Sep 1, 2007 4:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont think you understand...
Let's assume the Dbacks give exactly 3M to United Way every year since 98. I'm sure that's wrong, but if you want to assume their donations go up every year(ie based on inflation,etc) that's fine too, the same principle applies. And in the spirit of my hypothetical, let's assume K&M assessed attendance was failing and decided to extract or "unbudget" $500K from that budgeted $3M to try to spur late season ticket sales. By misleading fans into believing that ticket sales coming out of their pockets are actually generating additional donations.
Are you saying you dont take issue with that kind of deception? And my taking issue with it makes me less of a baseball fan?
Incidentally, the only reason I chimed in here is because G Dub addressed his post to me by name and, unlike Jim, doesnt have a history of locking up threads under false pretense when things arent going his way. So, I thought I'd share some perspective here. I hope that's copasetic to everyone in this fair land.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 1, 2007 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same old garbage
Got any facts to back up your hate of this club? didn't think so!
Wow, news flash, this team cannot do anything right in your eyes! <rolling eyes!>
by unnamedDBacksfan on Sep 1, 2007 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I get it. It's very clever.
I didn't say anything ABOUT ticket sales in my post, if you read. I said that the Dbacks are donating money to charity, so who cares about the circumstances? They could rob a bank to get the money but if it's going to the United Way, I couldn't care less how they got it. (And as a former teller, I don't take lightly to robbing banks!) I don't quite understand 1. your automatic assumption that the Dbacks are just doing something nefarious, and 2. your automatic stance against ANYTHING this team does. THAT'S why I call you less of a fan. If the team's doing something nice, even if it's not 100% altruistic, either say something nice or don't say anything at all.
I would also agree with johngordonma's contention that if the fact that it weren't new money ever got out, the Dbacks would be CRUCIFIED.
Incidentally, you are, of course, more than free to share your opinion. I don't appreciate the jab at Jim, though. I thought he locked that thread for good reason, after I read why.
by DbacksSkins on Sep 1, 2007 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jim runs
by unnamedDBacksfan on Sep 1, 2007 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reality vs. Hacks delusions
Or, in reality, after your opinions were proved woefully ill-informed and badly-constructed, and you resorted to spiteful insults in an effort to drag things out. Still, feel free to stop posting here. Any. Time. You. Want.
by Jim McLennan on Sep 1, 2007 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Spiteful Insults?
If you're tired of debating me, that's fine. You dont owe me a rebuttal. But if you're "done", dont be such a whiny pris about it, hiding behind selectively enforced "ground rules", then boasting elsewhere on the site that your "evidence" won the thread - when in fact you physically locked it. I consider that cowardly - and beneath you.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your "argument"
by Jim McLennan on Sep 2, 2007 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jim, if you werent so eager...
And thx for smearing the entirety of my loyal readership, like this brit, who's more intelligent and a better writer than either one of us. So "fact-based" of you ;-)
by Diamondhacks on Sep 3, 2007 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of smearing...
And what, pray tell, does this "intelligent" reader think of your smear campaign against Hall? I must have missed his comments on that.
by Jim McLennan on Sep 3, 2007 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chastised? And harshly? Oh, please.
I'll grant you biggerunit isn't a sycophant of yours, but more of your constant beatdown of the current front office. His posts are almost exclusively of the me too variety - unless he's harshly chastising you for taking your foot off Hall's (et al) throat.
by cavscout on Sep 4, 2007 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Harshly Chastising
"Harshly" isnt right - good catch. "Criticised" in place of "chastised" will do fine, also.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 4, 2007 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
FO charity
Second, I don't think there is any way Hall et al advertise this without it being new money. They're savvy enough to know that if that came out they would be KILLED. And really, I'd be at the head of that parade. I don't see anyway that is the case. So, assuming they are not lying, I think the United Way gesture is a fabulous one.
Third, feel free to throw those vouchers for that "overpriced junk" my way, Hacks. I don't know what merchandise you've bought at the park, but nothing I've bought I'd consider either overpriced or junk.
Finally, in terms of the D'Backs self-promotion of charitable affiliations... first, that is par for the course in any franchise. Just watch TBS or WGN. I've never been to a ballpark or listened to a radio broadcast of any team that doesn't do just that. Is it self-promotion? Sure. But does it also help out the charities. You betcha. If I'm working for United Way, I don't cringe every time we're plugged in a D'Backs broadcast because I think we're being used. No way. I'm thrilled for the pub. It's mutually beneficial, and that's what's beautiful.
I just don't see the reason to paint Collangelo white and this FO black (or vice versa). They both have their positives and their negatives. Collangelo was willing to do anything to win but lacked baseball savvy (thank heavens he had Rizzo on board... we're living on his legacy right now). This FO has a much higher baseball IQ (although of course they've made some dumb moves... you can't always win), but they clearly came in expecting that D'Backs fans cared a lot less about our history than we do and have made some gaffes because of that. Furthermore, we've yet to see how committed they are to winning when the time is ripe. We should find that out in the years to come.
I just don't see the reason for polarization here.
by johngordonma on Sep 1, 2007 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
John, thx for your comments...
Two things attracted me to snakepit. One, I really admire the effort Jim puts into it and his site is deservedly popular. Two, I feel he has certain settled opinions on things that I take exception to - and I take exception to the way he frames, and increasingly steers, some of the debates.
Regarding polarization, I'm certainly not going to paint myself as an innocent bystander - especially at first. It's clear, at least to me, we've influenced each other's thinking - I think that's a healthy thing.
But this baiting and polarization goes both ways too. Jim has acknowledged the baiting part, if not the polarization. It's interesting to note that after I vanished for several days (after Jim locked a thread), Diamondhacks "magically" reappeared, more prominently than ever despite my absence, courtesy of several snide Diamondhacks references from Jim. You'd think if I was so "tiresome", he'd leave it alone, but he obviously cant or wont. He's dredging me up every chance he gets. (Incidentally, I went back and reread the linked threads and stand by every word I said in July, despite Jim's attempt to condense the meaning out of what was actually said a month after the fact. Even today, he's crowing how he "exactly predicted" the Aug 16-12 record. I encourage anyone to read the FULL links and make their own judgements on these matters. )
I'm here today because G Dub called me by name , arguing that the FO is full of generous gestures (ie "take that, hacks" in an innocuous way, nothing personal). I responded, hopefully in the same spirit, by challenging some of his assumptions, asking what I feel are entirely plausible questions that no one else in town is asking. Let me be clear (again): I never claimed the Dbacks misallocated funds or reduced their overall UW donations. I claimed Hall has a history of misleading the fans(at this stage I've made the editorial decision to call it "lying")and I've asserted, here and elsewhere that his rationale for the donations(ie attendance exceeding expectations) is suspect.
They're savvy enough to know that if that came out they would be KILLED.
Agreed. They're also plenty savvy to know this would never see the light of day. It's plausible precisely because it's so risk free. Who's gonna even bring up, let alone pursue, this possibility besides me? Nick Piecoro? Buck on azcentral.com ;-) Would UW "push back" a big donor in town provided UW receives their "expected" level of donations one way or another? Maybe, but I doubt it. Only the fans would be victimized(fooled), making it a victimless "crime". If the Dbacks deceived the public on this, it would take an authoritative investigation to bring it to light. The US Congress couldnt make heads or tails of MLB's books - no one foresees a remotely threatening inquiry here.
Another reason it's plausible, IMO, is because Derrick Hall is an information controlling, message manipulating lying sack. Hall stated the donations were a "reward" to the fan base, for exceeding the FOs attendance projections. This runs so counter to Mr Hall's well documented company line well into early August that attendance was a nagging problem, as to render this sudden rationale of gate success highly implausible. You moan about lagging attendance all year and a week later slash loge ticket prices and offer gimmicks to drive sales, suddenly praising the same fans your broadcasters were excoriating earlier in the month? Sorry, I dont buy the "reward" angle. This is a club suddenly desperate to sell tickets. That could be a great thing, or not so great, depending on how desperate they are.
I applauded them at length recently for what I believe to be their first ticket promotion worth a damn in almost three years. I'm glad to do it actually - if it's tedious for you guys to read my rants about the same people over and over again, I can vouch they're sometimes tedious to write too, even if I think they deserve it and it broadens local debate. If they're finally getting serious about attracting more fans, after three years of pricing suppression and insensitivity, I'm all for that.
Cheers
by Diamondhacks on Sep 1, 2007 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Takes one to know one?
Well, I think this pretty much shows exactly the light in which all your opinions need to be interpreted. Way to keep the debate impersonal and on the high ground.
When you have any actual evidence for your theories - rather than making wild, unsubstantiated claims which would require a vast conspiracy involving both the Diamondbacks and the recipients of their charity, on both a local and national level - get back to us.
Until then, I'll be treating your opinion on this matter with the derision it deserves. Where should I send your tin-foil hat? :-)
by Jim McLennan on Sep 2, 2007 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Me too?
by DbacksSkins on Sep 2, 2007 2:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Takes One to Know One, indeed
Fair point. I clearly take liberties with principles( ie Hall) that I wouldnt ordinarily take with fellow posters. Is that hypocritical, distasteful? Maybe so - maybe I take a little too much glee in that and could tone that down - especially on your site.
But at least realize you do the same thing, calling Eric Byrnes a media whore, prostitute, etc. And loads of vicious comments about Russ Ortiz; even Luis Gonzalez. Would you address them similarly if they visited for an online chat?
Regarding Hall lying/misleading, the hard part for me isnt finding evidence, it's cataloging all of it and knowing where to start. The "lowest prices in baseball" lie, the "attendance" lie, the multiple "colors" lies, the lie about the $5 seats, the lie about the $1 seats, his continuous misrepresentation as to the # of season ticket accts. I'm sure I can find more quite easily - he's an endless source for this stuff - the satire pretty much writes itself. But now doesnt seem like a good time, since we're both hot under the collar, and if our past sparring matches are any indication, it may not be worth it, not with you anyway. I guess that's what you've been trying to tell me all along. That these ideas will not be tolerated on your site. Not as long as you're in charge. I just assumed that someone who was such a good writer would be more open to that type of discussion, but you're just...not. This is a club, not a community. Which is fine, it's your blog. I just took you too literally.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 3:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, Hacks....
by DbacksSkins on Sep 2, 2007 3:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 3:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Biting criticism, to be sure.
by DbacksSkins on Sep 2, 2007 4:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly,
by DbacksSkins on Sep 2, 2007 4:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Minor Point
1.Vast conspiracy?
2.Involving the recipients?
3. On both a local & nat'l lvel?
Talk about unsubstantiated claims, Jim, yowza, I never said any of this was required in my scenario. I apologize if I didnt make that more clear. I'm thinking more of a quiet, internal, back office accounting switcheroo that can be easily rationalized by those I'm predisposed to distrust :-)
I thought it was doubly interesting that Hall, the communications czar, made the announcement. Dont the Dbacks have a Charity or Community Relations Exec, or a Ticket Exec that would typically be the point person on something like this? Of course, it's not shocking Hall did the honors - as I say, he's controlled every word to the general public for some time now. But if you were running a tight little scam, Hall would be the perfect guy to position it just so, with no screwups and a big wide, earnest looking smile.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 4:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Call the cops!
You are basically claiming fraud, on a very, very significant level. Interested parties to that would probably include the IRS, charity regulators and someone I think we can all agree is a real publicity whore, Joe Arpaio. If you genuinely believe this happened, I suggest you bring this matter to their attention, and let them take the appropriate action - failing to do so, would make you little better than the perpetrators. If there actually was any kind of criminal case to issue, I guarantee you Nick Piecoro and the Republic would be all over that: who was it that broke the Grimsley story? But why do I feel certain you're not going to do anything like that, because you know your claim is completely unfounded.
On the subject of Hall"s "lying", let's just demolish one of your claims, regarding Ticket prices. An independent survey found the team to have the lowest ticket prices in the majors. Not Derrick Hall - unless you now also believe TMI are part of the vast, Diamondbacks conspiracy. Now, you can argue all you want about how the survey was carried out, or about Hall's taking the figures and running with them, but he's got far better ground for such a statement than you have for most of yours.
And one final note. If you want to come here and discuss facts, you're very welcome. But be warned that I'm going to be far more aggressive about deleting posts which have no actual content and simply engage in unwarranted personal attacks - whether it be on me, or anyone else, and by you, or anyone else. This should help ensure we all do not get diverted into irrelevancies.
by Jim McLennan on Sep 2, 2007 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Princes" Among Men
No. No it didnt. It found they had the lowest season ticket prices. That's a critical distinction, especially in Arizona. But you already "know" that. The last time we discussed this, I expounded on several aspects of that difference, incl links to other team's ticket sites, to take a closer look for yourself. IIRC, you dismissed this evidence as inconsequential.
Let me ask you this. Did you even look at the other team's ticket prices? Do you have even that much intellectual curiosity on this particular issue? Granted, I didnt provide you with an originally researched spreadsheet detailing all 30 team's actual price tiers - but is that, or something close to that, the threshold I'm held to, to be considered "fact based" in your world? While the President of the team we both chronicle (not some Joe who honestly misunderstood the TMI), willfully misleads a Valley of single ticket buyers with $13 ave claims, lowest MLB prices, etc?
I certainly dont expect you to share my unusual level of contempt for this strategy, but OTOH, why am I burdened with spoonfeeding you every morsel of definitive evidence available to man before you become even mildly interested in these substantive issues? You talk about tiresome :-) I think it's because, deep down, you dont really want to talk about them - not if it's going to compromise the veracity of your "Little Red Corvette" - at least not too much.
So you tend to pooh pooh inconvenient facts, or mischaracterise compelling contrarian arguments, rather than objectively assessing them. Admittedly, I do the same when clinging to my tattered 2001 album, "Purple Reign: When Yanks Cry" But I can recognize it, laugh about it a little, and even let go here and there (like about the Arte Moreno/JC spat.) But I get the sense that, apart from an occasional bitch about the Diamond Club, you're not letting go. Not of your fandom. I'm not asking you to do that. But of this brand of results-based subjectivity that, apparently, fuels that fandom.
You've done it again on this thread, fabricating vast conspiracies and criminal cases; embellishing/misrepresenting, or perhaps genuinely misunderstanding, the little victimless, back office wink wink I laid out.
Let's step back a sec. Aside from whether this deception actually happened, aside from that , do you think Jeff Moorad is capable, on an ethical level, of championing something like this? Here, I'll make this easy for you. If Jerry Colangelo ever acted similarly [drumroll], it would not shock me. OK. I understand why someone chummy with Moorad would find my scenario "tiresome", but why are you so outraged by my little speculation, as to turn it into Watergate or Vietnam? I'm just tired of repeating myself and spoonfeeding you every last morsel to even hope to enter into an open, free wheeling discussion.
If you want to come here and discuss facts, you're very welcome.
Appreciate the sentiment, Jim, but it just isnt true. It's a false invitation - or at least it has been. I'll take your word for it that you're sincere in trying to be fair, but I just dont feel you're ready to discuss a number of issues in a dispassionate way. I'm partly to blame for that. Maybe mostly. Sorry for that. But if you envision yourself as some dispassionate moderator, nurturing the entire spectrum of fact based discussion and (heaven forbid!)S-P-E-C-U-L-A-T-I-O-N, then you really ought to take a closer look in the mirror.
...I'm going to be far more aggressive about deleting posts which have no actual content...
So, you will unilaterally control the flow of information here - more than you already do? Well, that's one way to go, I suppose. I certainly cant stop you. But let me suggest this, because your blog has so many things going for it(thx to you) and I'd hate to see that potential go unrealized. Disseminate clear ground rules that everyone can understand and abide by. Get some input from other readers. And consider sharing the policeman's badge - not with me - but you've got some intelligent, fair minded people here who, if willing, are more than capable, IMO.
That's my two cents. Good luck.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 3, 2007 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for contacting customer support.
From the TMR site: "The FCI includes: two adult average price tickets; two child average price tickets; four small soft drinks; two small beers; four hot dogs; two programs; parking; and two adult-size caps." No mention of season tickets there as such, but if you have evidence to the contrary, by all means...
Still, let's give you that one, for now. Regardless, TMR will have adopted the same standards for every team in the majors - they're not comparing our season-ticket prices with Boston's single-game prices. So it would seem an entirely fair comparison. And even if they were using season-ticket prices, I believe that represents the majority of sales. So wouldn't that be the most sensible bench-mark to use, rather than the prices paid by a minority of attendees?
But as we've seen elsewhere (the ESPN poll), when the facts do not fit your world-view, the facts must be wrong. Your agenda in these matters is so painfully obvious: that is why I treat everything you say with such a huge degree of skepticism. Sure, Derrick Hall has an agenda: he's got a business to promote, and so, naturally, he's going to do so, and I treat his statements appropriately. But your own agenda was made very, very clear by the very amusing list of demands over on your blog as well as your previous comments about Hall. I think I know who I'm more inclined to trust. A clue: it's not the person who has an axe to grind, but can't do it, because of the F-sized chip on his shoulder.
[ I get the sense that, apart from an occasional bitch about the Diamond Club, you're not letting go. Not of your fandom. I'm not asking you to do that. But of this brand of results-based subjectivity that, apparently, fuels that fandom. ]
LOL. Diamondhacks lecturing me on "subjectivity". Folks, we're truly through the looking-glass now. Previous criticism of existing management have been far from limited to the Diamond Club. The signing of Russ Ortiz? You might recall me mildly chastising that. :-) The extension of Eric Byrnes? I was one of those before the deal, providing reasons why it shouldn't happen. Hall's plan to shut off sections in the upper deck? Hated it. Sure, generally, I think ownership has done a fine job of digging themselves out of the cess-pit of debt created by Colangelo, practising fiscal restraint on a scale unseen in the Jerry era. But they have made mistakes, and I've not held back there at all. I have no agenda. Hall doesn't pay my wages, and nor did he sully the memory of my saintly idol. That gives me a freedom to be far more neutral than...well, let's just say, some people.
[ why are you so outraged by my little speculation, as to turn it into Watergate or Vietnam? ]
Because, as mentioned, this marks a new low-water mark for you. Previously, you've had at least some grounds for your claims. But this time, it's simply a fabrication with no evidence to back it up at all - you've been asked for this, multiple times here, and all you've given us is your wife rolling her eyes [which if yours is like mine, probably happens every third time you mention baseball. :-)] You're also not just claiming ill-will or embellishment, you are suggesting felonious behavior by ownership. That isn't a "little speculation", it's a very serious claim, especially when repeated multiple times, in a variety of locations, as you have done. I'm sure your CEO Fortune 500 wife would not be happy if someone accused her of criminal behavior.
[ let me suggest this, because your blog has so many things going for it(thx to you) and I'd hate to see that potential go unrealized. Disseminate clear ground rules that everyone can understand and abide by. Get some input from other readers. And consider sharing the policeman's badge - not with me - but you've got some intelligent, fair minded people here who, if willing, are more than capable, IMO. ]
I'm sorry, what part of "deleting posts which have no actual content and simply engage in unwarranted personal attacks," was in any way unclear? If you or anyone else wants to engage in that kind of thing, go join your pal biggerunit on the MLB board. Otherwise, you're welcome here and there should be no problems. But I don't tell you how to run your site, and would never presume to do so. I will, however, pass your comments to the appropriate department. Please let us know if we can help you in any other way. :-)
by Jim McLennan on Sep 3, 2007 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yawn
And your actual evidence for this insinuation would be...
None at all. Thought not. Next, please. Your obsession with twisting everything into the most negative way possible, is really quite tiresome.
by Jim McLennan on Sep 1, 2007 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tiresome, yes...
It's when things devolve to personal insults that I find Hacks (or anyone else) irksome. There are plenty of those types of blogs (azcentral.com, for one)... and I'd rather chew on an old pair of shoes than get involved in those sorts of blog-melees.
by johngordonma on Sep 1, 2007 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good concept
LOL. I like that. I'm all in favor of contrarian voices. But as with my interest in conspiracy theories, such voices need to be backed up with evidence if they are to be any more than a passing amusement in a "let's laugh at the tin-foil hat brigade" way. Some of his past comments make sense, but this one is, thus far, closer to the likes of David Icke and Arizona Wilder, rather than "smart and informed".
by Jim McLennan on Sep 1, 2007 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Additional Reason Why
Allow me to introduce you to Mrs Diamondhacks. Not a "super fan", but a fan - I dont think she even knows the name of my blog. Much to my chagrin, she actually thinks Derrick Hall is an effective spokesman. Grrrrr. Anyway, she's a Fortune 100 exec; not a subject matter specialist in charitable budgeting, by any means, but has a fair amount of visibility to it. When she first heard of these $5 "donations", she rolled her eyes and assumed it was a sham, before I did actually.
Her skepticism doesnt prove anything, either, of course, as to the Diamondbacks actual actions here. I'm not suggesting it does. But it emboldens me to use a word that I eschewed earlier to describe the view that the type of deception I outlined would be "shocking", "highly unlikely", etc. And that word, forgive me, is "naive". Not wrong. Nothing personal intended, Just naive. Contrast me as "cynical" - that's fine - I certainly am when it comes to Hall. I just suspect that, in some organizations more than others, moving money internally from one bucket to another is not an uncommon practice, based on business needs, goals, etc.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 1:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yawn
Do you ever talk about baseball or just focus your narrow beam on your dislike of the current FO?
by unnamedDBacksfan on Sep 2, 2007 2:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exclusive Bonus Coverage
Her skepticism doesnt prove anything, either, of course, as to the Diamondbacks actual actions here. I'm not suggesting it does.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 3:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So
by unnamedDBacksfan on Sep 2, 2007 3:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whaddya wanna talk about
Run diff?
The callups?
BoMel MOTY?
Fire away. I'm game. Just remember, this started out as a front office thread that invoked the name Diamondhacks. If you dont want me involved, then dont start the post saying "This is especially for Diamondhacks", ya know. Gets, uh, tiresome that way ;-)
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 4:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know....
by DbacksSkins on Sep 2, 2007 4:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm really glad you asked that
CoJack's up.
We neeeeed a hit, Conor.
Pop up. Damn.
Why is Tony on the bench today, anyway. Grrr!}
Seriously, I dont wanna impose on that. I'd feel like a troll, or an obnoxious fan at the ballpark, spoiling your fun. Goodness knows, it would be easy to do - the lows can get pretty low in there - but I dont want to exploit that. The game itself is a sanctuary to me. Enjoy.
The other reason is the threads have gotten so big lately and I'm a pretty slow typer - I'd have some trouble keeping up - even if I have something pleasant to say :-)
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 4:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Even so...
I've got another question. (And it's not rhetorical, although it may come off that way) Exactly WHAT do you want to see the Dbacks (FO, management, ownership, whatever) do? As in, what would placate your anger towards this team?
by DbacksSkins on Sep 2, 2007 5:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
WWGCD?
All I ask is for an apology, a refund,....and for that man to be fired! --George Costanza
by bdberry637 on Sep 2, 2007 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kudos
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to make a very important airport pickup.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
omigod
by andrewinnewyork on Sep 3, 2007 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
thx for the invite & question...
At this point, it's probably more appropriate that I answer your question over at my place, rather than here - so I've done so.
Have fun everybody.
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, don't get me wrong, I find you a pain...
Not that any of this means that I will give up my scorn of your endless cynicism.
Your response on your blog to my question, by the way, was as expected: the majority of the substance centered around the Colangelo affair. The ticket/concessions price issue is not a Dbacks issue, but rather a criticism of the entire league. Regarding Colangelo, I'll humor your criticism of my being young, silly and petty (I am a good sport, by the way. ;) Thank you.) so long as you accept my criticism that the Colangelo grudge is ALSO a bit silly and petty.
We're over 40 posts, by the way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by DbacksSkins on Sep 2, 2007 11:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not only tiresome.......
by shoewizard on Sep 1, 2007 5:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Tiresome?
by Diamondhacks on Sep 2, 2007 3:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um.
by soco on Sep 2, 2007 12:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This sentiment I agree with.
by Azreous on Sep 3, 2007 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not the quantity of posts
by shoewizard on Sep 2, 2007 12:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well...
stays out of the rest
by Wimb on Sep 3, 2007 11:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
But don't you get it?
Yours,
Disgusted in Epping
by Jim McLennan on Sep 3, 2007 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
B...B..wha?
by nihil67 on Sep 3, 2007 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Back to this?
I had forgotten about this diary but remember when seeing G Dubs entry it was going to set off a powderkeg of the same old, same old.
It's been a Hack Attack(TM). Wheeee!
A comment someone made (Hacks I think) about tying charity to ticket sales made me wonder if ASU football was still requiring season ticket holders to 'donate' to their Sun Angel charity?
by cavscout on Sep 3, 2007 11:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Those evil souls at ASU
by andrewinnewyork on Sep 4, 2007 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sun Angels
by nihil67 on Sep 4, 2007 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How dare they!!??
by DbacksSkins on Sep 4, 2007 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did some looking
You know, the crappy seats.
All other season ticket holders must pay between $50 and $1500 per seat.
Obviously there have been questions raised about the legality because the AG had this ruling:
http://www.azag.gov/opinions/1999/I99-028.html
In short: yes, it is legal.
by cavscout on Sep 4, 2007 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love Greer
by shoewizard on Sep 4, 2007 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And while we're at it
by Wimb on Sep 5, 2007 8:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 



















