D-Backs buoyed by fresh outlook
You know there's something up when Dan 'Cubbie' Bickley is hopping on the D-backs bandwagon. "There's something appealing about this team, something that commands attention. Justin Upton is poised to become the Valley's greatest attraction, a five-tool player chasing three magic letters (M-V-P). Conor Jackson is healthy and clubbing the ball once again. Stephen Drew finally is being pushed from behind, and the newest starting pitcher (Edwin Jackson) has been more like a startling pitcher."
Also of interest: AJ Hinch "has won over his players with energy, sincerity, exuberance and intelligence. He's an atypical manager, all right, but in a good way. Webb said. "He had to earn our trust, and he did. I think he's going over real well. We really like playing for him, his philosophies and stuff."" and - this'll please Ed - "The organization is trying hard to change the yucky vibe at home, moving away from the ham-handed, in-game shenanigans that mock an authentic ballpark experience."
almost 2 years ago
Jim McLennan
61 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
eD
is pleased.
Steam Rollin' Cub's fans like an 18 wheeler with a drunk driver driving. There's no survivin'.
Authentic in-game experience
is a bunch of crap.
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
Not only eD. . .
but me, too. All the gimmicks and bells and whistles that distract from the game are a hallmark of a bad team. With a more motivated, experienced and arguably talented everyday lineup (although there are some real question marks regarding the depth of the rotation), maybe the team marketeers will be reined in a bit in favor of a renewed focus on the game itself.
Bells and whistles
have no connection to the performance of a team. The hallmark of a bad team is a crappy record.
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
Actually. . .
‘bells and whistles’ seem to appear in greater abundance when a team isn’t performing well. A baseball team is a business, and when a team is not playing well, it’s harder to get fannies into the seats, hence gimmicks, bells and whistles to make going to a baseball game more attractive, an ‘experience,’ so to speak.
But when the team is good, people will go to see the games and the gimmicks, et cetera, (while there will still be plenty of sideshows), become more of a diversion than a focus.
All in all, given the uptick in (cautious) optimism regarding this team, this is a good thing.
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
If
you’re going try to make a connection, maybe you should cite some data. Somehow I doubt you’ll be able to.
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
Absence of evidence Is not evidence of absence
It certainly makes empirical sense that when a team’s performance on the field is wanting, they should ramp up the stuff off the field. See also cinema, where mediocre to crap movies rake in the bucks when given gimmicks like 3D.
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
In this case,
if you’re using ‘empirical’ as ‘experiential,’ I think you’re right. I think it is the case that when the main product isn’t as good as one would hope, a business needs to add other attractions to ramp up business.
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
It might
except that teams like the Diamondbacks have always had other things going on whether times are good or bad. How is that explained in your model?
And the absense of evidence defense is crap here because there’s no reason to believe the original premise has any merits. The burden of proof is on NASCAR, and if there is no evidence beyond a series of shaky logic statements, then you’re going to have a hard time making much a statement.
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
How about this?
When the games are good, and the team is competitive, the other stuff (bells, whistles, smooch cams and the like) doesn’t distract so much from the primary mission of a baseball game from the fan’s perspective.
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay
I can buy this statement, but at this point it’s only your perception that has changed. So the statement should be “the increased awareness of bells and whistles by fans is the hallmark of a bad team,” not that the bells and whistles themselves are the hallmark.
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
I'm never
on the kiss cam or muscle cam. WTF HALL ? W.T.F. ?
Steam Rollin' Cub's fans like an 18 wheeler with a drunk driver driving. There's no survivin'.
I'm only on it
when I’m there with a most definitely not date. Or my brother. That one was fun.
What's your name? Sandwich. What's your first name? TUNA.
by emilylovesthedbacks on Mar 14, 2010 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I would disagree.
When the team is competitive and the game is good, the bells and whistles just annoy me all to shreds. I want to watch the game, head office fools, not see smooch cams.
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base. ~Dave Barry
by 4 Corners Fan on Mar 15, 2010 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions
ugh
smooch cam is awesome.
Steam Rollin' Cub's fans like an 18 wheeler with a drunk driver driving. There's no survivin'.
there’s no reason to believe the original premise has any merits
I beg to differ. I think it has significant merits. Entertainment has always been used as a diversion and distraction from harsh and unpalatable realities, since the Roman days of “bread and circuses”. Why should a baseball franchise be exempt from this? It’s up to you to prove otherwise.
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
How
does anything you just said show that “bells and whistles” are the hall mark of a bad franchise?
Yes, entertainment has been used as a diversion and distraction. So what? In what way does this connect back to the original premise that “all the gimmicks and bells and whistles that distract from the game are a hallmark of a bad team.”
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
Er....
Because it’s a perfect case of entertainment being used as a diversion and distraction?
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
As far as entertainment is concerned
this is promising to be an entertaining season, especially if the ’Backs can solve this tail-end of the rotation problem.
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Hence the decision to cut back
On the off-field entertainment. Basically, proving the point: this team should be better, so there’s less need for off-field distractions.
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions
So
is baseball in general, bells and whistle-free or not. There’s two separate things going on here: baseball, and the other stuff. They had happen within the same confines. What does that have to do with Roman entertainment distracting from life sucking for slaves?
Roman entertainment ==> distraction from awfulness of life
hot dog races ==> distraction from baseball
I’m sorry if I don’t completely get your analogy.
How do you intend to show that bells and whistles are hallmarks of a bad team, not fan’s perception, as NASCAR has clarified?
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
By extension
Because it clearly applies in other areas of entertainment too
Crappy movies → gimmicks like three-D
Crappy music → flashy Britney promo videos
Crappy baseball → cheerleaders throwing T-shirts into the stands.
Most people don’t really differentiate between standing up and cheering for a winning team, and standing up and cheering for a free T-shirt. It’s pretty much the same psychologically. And from the owner’s point of view, it’s a lot cheaper to “fix” a bad ballpark experience by hiring some interns and getting a sponsor to give you some shirts, than build a farm system and spend tens of millions on free agents.
Witness the long suckitude of the Cubs and Red Sox. For decades, the owners didn’t give a damn, because Wrigley Field sold out anyway. There’s something to be said for bandwagoning fans in this area. :-)
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not
sure that the Cubs and Red Sox are good example for the issue afflicting the Diamondbacks. Both of those franchises have long been “traditional” franchises, so they weren’t exactly attempting to alleviate the fans with gimmicks.
And back to the original analogy, saying:
Crappy baseball ==> cheerleaders throwing t-shirts into the stands
isn’t true, since the DIamondbacks have done these types of gimmicks regardless if the team is good or not. If anything, the recent behavior is a move away from that. Previously the model would be:
Gimmicks ==> distracting from bad baseball
Gimmicks ==> distracting from good basball
There’s not much difference between the two, only the perception.
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
Gimmicks ==> distracting from bad baseball
Gimmicks ==> distracting from good baseball
That, I would agree with. There’s certainly truth to the fact that people don’t notice out of game amusements so much on a winning team.
However, I think the D-backs have increased “these types of gimmicks” – the cheerleaders, Mike and Vanessa, etc. definitely were not about in 2001. I wouldn’t be surprised if their introduction was after the 111-loss season.
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
They
probably have. It’s hard to really say, but they’ve certainly changed the gimmicks over time.
I think a more interesting question at this point, now that I think we’re all pretty much in agreement, is why do teams feel they need to introduce more? Do they have some sort of group focus information where people are clamoring for more hot dog races?
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
I think there are two dimensions that should be considered
1) The ‘bells and whistles’ seem to be an important marketing tool, especially for poorer performing teams; and
2) a lot of ‘bells and whistles’ are regarded as a hallmark of minor league marketing.
The D’Backs had difficulties recently, and there was pressure placed on the FOS to find things that would attract people to the games. I have to say that I’ve been more impressed with Mr. Byrnes in this offseason than I was last year and hence my optimism for a better season.
All that other stuff isn’t going to go away all together, but if we’re intently watching the games, all the other stuff will fade as distractions.
Wouldn’t that be great?
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Should be "FO"
not FOS, which means something else. . .
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't think its an empirical observation
so “data” may not be an appropriate measure.
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
So
how do you intend to demonstrate that the correlation between “bells and whistles” and a team’s success?
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
Are you asking for a lesson in measurement?
Because there is a lot of research regarding attention and focus in the psychology literature.
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Well
since you clarified your statement above, what I would have been asking is showing how “bells and whistles” are the hallmark of a bad team, not the perception of “bells and whistles.” There’s a huge difference between these two ideas. I agree completely with the idea that “bells and whistles” are more noticeable when a team is bad, but not that there is an increase or decrease in conjunction with a team’s success or lack of success.
So I think we’re on the same page now? Maybe?
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
Sure, I don't think we were ever that far apart on the matter
I think we want to see good, quality baseball, and stands filled with enthusiastic, knowledgeable baseball fans supporting a community asset.
How’s that for Chronic Spring Training Optimism Syndrome?
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I forgot it should be
“Recurring Chronic Spring Training Optimism Syndrome.”
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
The announcement of an "Uptown" section
Would seem a bit of a double-edged sword on this basis. While I’m delighted to see them marketing one of their own players, remember the disdain with which we treated “Mannywood”? To be consistent, it shouldn’t make much difference that it’s one of our own, though I think any neutral would likely agree that Upton is a much better person to honor than Mrs. Ramirez.
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
But think of all the fun metaphors. . .
“Uptown hit that ball downtown.”
“The Diamondbacks are going Uptown tonight.”
Maybe its a whole new chapter in the ongoing history of D’Back marketing?
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Personally
I think there’s a difference between setting up a section around a player who’s come up through the organization, and setting up a section around a guy who was basically traded to you out of sheer exasperation.
"Now we can just call you Kishi Laptop, Esquire."
Yep, this
though there is less risk with setting one up for a guy who is well established (if on the decline) then a guy who has had success but could still fall short.
There’s a joke here somewhere with Byrnes and Hooversville but I’ve got nothing. TAG OUT
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
Like I said
“Upton is a much better person to honor than Mrs. Ramirez.” Good point that it is definitely a risk, given he has only two seasons of major-league experience, and still gets eaten up by sliders.
Personally, though, I’d rather they focused on the team, not individuals within it.
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 2:07 PM EDT up reply actions
"Personally, though, I’d rather they focused on the team, not individuals within it."
Word, dude, word.
But it’s really likely that this may be part of the contractual agreement between J-Up and the ’Backs.
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I would too
But the reality is that never happens. It’s never “Can the Colts win the Super Bowl,” it’s always about Peyton Manning. It’s easier to market if there’s a smaller group to focus on. I mean, look at the 2001 World Series- most of what you’ll hear is about Randy, Curt, and Gonzo.
"Now we can just call you Kishi Laptop, Esquire."
You'll hear about it *now*
Because they were the heroes of Game 7, in particular. And when we win the World Series, I’ll be delighted to hear about Webb, Haren and Upton. :-) But was that the case at the time in 2001? I’m not so sure. I certainly know the left-field bleachers weren’t named Gonzo-go or anything like that…
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Whilst on the topic
I’m going to share a possible mea culpa in that I think the front office may have found a polished diamond in Edwin Jackson. He looks like he has excellent stuff, which I’ve always said should be the first consideration for a pitcher.
by NASCARbernet on Mar 14, 2010 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm
watching the NBC hockey game of the week right now (Capitals/Blackhawks), and they just asked the question: “Should Ovechkin win the Cup this year?”
Marketers love individuals.
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
True that
But if that player falls from grace [coughByrnescough], the blowback is monstrous.
"We defy augury" -- Hamlet
by Jim McLennan on Mar 14, 2010 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions
That's true
but Ovechkin is more like A-rod in hockey.
All targets neutralized. Program completed. By your command.
That's certainly true.
Paul Zimmerman at SI always used to rant about that…. about how the producers of most NFL broadcasts would push the announcers to plug the stars over and over and over again. That’s partly why you’ll notice that a lot of networks’ “A-Team” (Aikman/Buck, etc.) will do it, while if you listen to the “B-Team” and below, they’re much more natural, talking about role players, blocking, special teams and such.
I keep trying to reset my password to "penis", but it keeps telling me "too short".
the NFL in itself
is kinda dumb. Yeah let’s ttly stop the game so we can do a dumb dance for making a routine takle in the 1st quarter. Hurrrrrrrrrrrrr
Steam Rollin' Cub's fans like an 18 wheeler with a drunk driver driving. There's no survivin'.
The NFL? Heck....
in terms of league parity, it’s far and away superior to the rest of the pro leagues.
Now, if you wanna criticize football in particular, that’s a separate debate.
I keep trying to reset my password to "penis", but it keeps telling me "too short".
If I wasn't so lazy
I’d go back and find that article soco linked to a while back about how much time in a football game is actually spent playing football.
"Now we can just call you Kishi Laptop, Esquire."
Something like 12 minutes
I keep trying to reset my password to "penis", but it keeps telling me "too short".
It's always a risk
Even with a more established player, you can never be certain. You could have a guy blow out a knee, or get caught using female fertility drugs. =)
"Now we can just call you Kishi Laptop, Esquire."
I agree
Steam Rollin' Cub's fans like an 18 wheeler with a drunk driver driving. There's no survivin'.
I'm shocked
By how… good… this article is. At least to an excessively optimistic fan like me who is encouraged by seeing even the most pessimistic show optimism. Although calling LaRoche “an excellent first-baseman” might be a slight stretch.
"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."
by Dan Strittmatter on Mar 15, 2010 11:11 AM EDT reply actions
The unfortunate thing about this column
Is that in yesterday’s paper, it was shoved down the page beneath a huge article that just re-phrased all the some stupid crap we’ve heard about the Cubs Spring Training facility before.
"Now we can just call you Kishi Laptop, Esquire."
Argh....
same old Dickley.
I keep trying to reset my password to "penis", but it keeps telling me "too short".
Nope
Bickley was the one actually talking good about the team, the article telling us the same lies like how the Cubs play in the league’s “most-antiquated stadium” was by Bob Young.
"Now we can just call you Kishi Laptop, Esquire."
Shut up with your "facts", Devin.
Somehow, I’m gonna find a way to blame Dickley and not give him his due credit.
He probably exercised editorial control over the layout of the page. Or something.
I keep trying to reset my password to "penis", but it keeps telling me "too short".
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
