MVN - Most Valuable Network

Wrap Up Thoughts : Attendance

Paraphrasing Stan :  “The Nats will get the attendance they deserve”

Well, not quite, Stan.  The Nats, despite having the worst record in the majors, did not have the worst attendance in the league. They were #20, and deserved that #19 spot but a lost home game cost them a spot in the teens.  The final tally?  2,320,400 or 29,005 a game.  Not bad, but not terribly good. If this were your average season, you’d accept that number and move on.

Of course it wasn’t an average season.  The Nats opened a new ballpark this year (how easy it is to forget), and drawing only 2.32 million fans to the first season of a new park is disappointing.  A new park is supposed to be an attraction in itself, something to bump up fan interest while the management works on other things.  The new park drew a scarce 375K more fans into the seats than last year, or about 4700 more fans per game.  That’s not enough, not for a market of this size.  

There are plenty of reasons/excuses on why this didn’t happen, but all that really matters is that it did.  Fewer fans equals less revenue which could equal less money management commits to the team.   This can create a vicious cycle of losing.  History tells us that this kind of losing can drive a team out of any area.  With the District’s history of losing teams, we’ll hear about this more and more if the fans don’t come.  Moot point you say?  The Nationals are “stuck” in DC for the long term thanks to the new park?  One would think so, but given the Lerner’s are fighting now not to pay rent because the city didn’t deliver on what they expected, is it crazy to think they can go a few steps further?   That they could fight to leave in 3 years because the city didn’t deliver?  Yeah, it probably is crazy, (what city would go into a public financing deal if a team can just pull up stakes in 5 years?) but the “probably” is what bothers me.  I want definitely, absolutely crazy.

What should the Nats expect/hope for/need/dread in attendance next year?  Let’s assume, like most of us do, that the team improves next year - health, injuries and the like.  Where does that put them?  Without the unlikely free agency move - let’s say 75 wins.  Not a great season but certainly a season of watchable baseball and a notable improvement over this year.  That should increase attendance.   Working against the Nats is the fact the stadium isn’t new anymore and the fact the Nats are out of the honeymoon period now.  For fans in the DC area, baseball isn’t the shiny new toy anymore.  Now the apathy that comes with losing season after season begins to creep in.  This kind of apathy takes back to back winning seasons to break.

Right now, I would expect somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.0-2.1 million.  Even though it’s a better season the interest isn’t going to increase with a better team unless it’s significantly better.

I would hope for 2.4-2.5 million.  This would show a growing fanbase regardless of the park and a winning season would potentially explode this figure past the 3 million mark.

The Nats probably need NOT to drop in attendance, especially if they are 15 games or so better.  By lowering tickets prices they are showing they are aggressively fighting the sophomore slump.  I’d expect one or two more things designed to bring in fans to be announced over the offseason.  Smaller ticket plans, attractive family plans, new amenities.  Dare we even say it : a marquee free agent?

The dreaded number would be anything below 2 million.  That would mean the park bought the Nats one year of decent attendance and now they HAVE to earn it on the field, with a winning ballclub ASAP.  This is something that may not happen for several more years unless the cards play out right.   This would be a portent of bottom of the barrell attendance.  I don’t think this will happen - though that could change if the Orioles start providing an interesting alternative.  (Look out 2013 Nats!)

I take back what I said earlier.  The Nats do get the attendance they deserve, but it’s inexorably tied to the successes and failures of the major league squad.  Everything else is playing at the fringes.  Give the city a consistent winner and we’ll see strong numbers.  Give the team a loser, even one filled with youth and potential, and the seats will remain empty.  The Nats are trying to create a consistent winner, but are taking the slow road.  Is it going to be so slow that it will seriously damage the fanbase?  We’ll see.

[A side note : Boston averaged “104%” attendance per game this year.  This is ridiculous.  Not the fact that they can draw fans - winning team, passionate fanbase, historic park - that should happen.  No, my problem is with the 104%.  There’s probably good reason for this, though all I can think of is that they are making 1000+ fans pay for the privelege of standing in Fenway during a game.  In my head selling out every game = 100%.  That’s the way it should be.  If you are going to allow in a certain number of fans into every game beyond the seats you have then that’s your new maximum capacity. 

Forget the price cut.  The Nats should rip out seats, say they only got 15K, then bring in folding chairs for game time.  Instant 180% attendance for the year!]

Losing is infectious

A few days ago I made my HORRENDOUSLY incorrect picks for the playoffs. Picks so bad, you could swear I’ve got that book that Biff had in Back to the Future and I was purposely trying to throw you off my trail.  Well anyway, I noted the teams that had the Nats that were left and how did they do?

The Twins with one active ex-Nat never officially made it into the playoffs.  

The Cubbies with the most ex-Nats got swept out of the playoffs.

It’s a disease.  We should probably just sweep the team clean, throw out everyone involved in this mess, disinfect the stadium, and bring in all new healthy people. 

Given that you think I would favor Boston and Philly in the series, given their complete lack of Nationals taint.  However, I’m thinking more Dodgers and Rays.  These teams cast away the disease before it could get to them, LA pulling Gary Bennett off the active roster, the Rays dealing Brendan Harris to the Twins.  They are now innoculated, what hasn’t killed them has made them stronger.   They are the true scrappy survivors of the post season. 

I Love/Hate these guys

Now that the playoffs are decided (and I proved myself to be spectacularly wrong) and the Nats aren’t in it, you may need a team to root for.  But which one to choose?  They all look so good!  

Some people, like me and the greatest franchise of all-time Yankees, have other loyalties.  Some go with division teams.  Others go against division teams.  Some find a player or two they like and go for that team.  Other have players/coaches/friends they don’t like and cheer for their teams to lose.  It’s all up to you.  In case you are having trouble deciding.  I’ve come up with some reasons to pull for (or root against) every team in the playoffs.

National League

Chicago Cubs

For : A blessed end to the stories about Billy Goats and Bartman.  Waiting 100 years is deserving, especially when it wasn’t filled with a bunch of close calls, but instead year after year of mind-blowing suckitude.  The best team in the NL this year. Wrigley hosting World Series baseball - totally cool. 

Against : Could turn the Cubs fans insufferable (see: Red Sox).  Baseball would lose the last of the truly long-suffering squads.  Would have to turn to Cleveland next for stories. Yawn.

Los Angeles Dodgers

For : More Dodger baseball means more Vin Scully.  Zack Morris’ team.  More shots of Kirk Gibson’s ‘88 Series HR. Shouldn’t the Dodgers be in a World Series every 20 years or so?

Against : More Dodger baseball means more Tommy Lasorda.  Might be the worst team in the playoffs. You don’t want anyone who thought signing Andruw Jones and Juan Pierre was a good idea being rewarded by the Gods.  LoDuca.

Milwuakee Breweres 

For : What has Milwuakee done to you?

Against : What has Milwuakee done for you?

Philadelphia Phillies

For : Kept the Mets out of the playoffs, don’t they deserve some sort of reward?  For all the sports in Philly and the passion of their fans, they’ve gotten little return on their emotional investment.

Against : Then again, they are Phillies fans.

American League

Boston Red Sox

For : If you are a fan of having great teams, a win by the Red Sox would cement them as the dyansty of the late 2000’s and potentially beyond.  Always fun to watch a game played at Fenway.

Against : You need me to think of a reason?  How about Papelbon’s face?  Ok seriously : Insufferabilty of fans would grow even larger.  Dustin Pedroia could become the new Jeter and sportstalk would focus on how great he was until 2020 or so.  Talk about the team with the 4th highest payroll in baseball (133 million) being “gamers” who “know how to win”.

Chicago White Sox

For : Perennial Underdogs in their own town.  Would be nice to see Thome and Griffey win one. Would make Jay Mariotti unhappy, I bet.   Possibly the only team in the AL who wouldn’t be saddled with “Plays the game the right way” rhetoric.

Against: Didn’t they just win one? Have arguably the least likeable announcer (Hawk Harrelson), least likeable player (AJ Pierzynski), and you may hate the manager (Ozzie Guillen) too.   

Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim

For : A quality team that has gotten little notice all year long.  Vlad still hasn’t won one.  West Coast games always pose a problem for major league baseball it can be fun to watch them squirm.

Against : Not nearly as good as record would indicate.  Like the Red Sox, we’d hear about the scrappiness of a team with a high payroll.   Outside of Vlad who on this team are you interested in seeing for more than one series?

Tampa Bay Rays

For : For the haters of large payroll teams would prove that you can win without spending a lot of money.  Would serve as a nice showcase for a ton of young talent. Given the competition in the AL East, have a difficult path here every year - should do the most with it while they can.

Against : We already know you can win in a single season without spending a lot of money - don’t need to keep hearing it. They have like 15 thousand fans total, not at the games, but in the country.   The “Trop” in the World Series?  No thank you.  May give the Lerner’s ideas that going only youth is a sure way to succeed - hello 30 million dollar payroll.

Playoff picks - for the hell of it

Today - Twins over the White Sox.  Seems like one of those games that the no name pitcher comes out and dominates.  The Twins have the no name guy going (Blackburn).

ALDS

Boston over the Angels - The Angels have only won one playoff series since winning the World Series, yet you never hear anything but praise for these scrappy bastards.  Oh to be the #2 baseball team in a market already laid-back about success.

Twins over the Rays - The Rays will be the second biggest story if they can make it past this round (behind the Cubs) so obviously they will lose.

NLDS

Cubs over Dodgers - Have you seen the Dodgers?  Talk about a roll of the dice. Everyone’s collective Cubs-love will not allow them to lose.  Doubles ruled Home Runs, fair ball called foul,  runs mysteriously tacked onto the scoreboard

Brewers over Phillies - It’s the Phillies.  

ALCS

Twins over the Red Sox - The media is slated to lose at least one favorite each round and this year the Cubs are more important. 

N     L    C    S   NLCS! NLCS! NLCS!

Cubs over Brewers - Seriously they won’t be allowed to lose.

World Series

Twins over Cubs - Twins are unbeatable at the homerdome in the World Series, despite how much they actually suck.  Maybe next year Cubs 

You see this way, my prediction can be totally ruined by 10:00PM today and then I don’t have to worry about it anymore. This is also the match-up one would predict if they went by former Nationals.  There are only two in the post-season unless I’m mistaken.   Brendan Harris on the Twins and Daryle Ward on the Cubs.  (ed - note.   Steven tells me some guy named “Soriano” played for the Nats.  I’ll take his word for it)

It’s fate I tells ya.