$alt River Field$ @ $ilent $tick

As a rule, I dont have a problem with untelevised exhibition games. Cactus contests should be intimate, visceral affairs - a first hand, bygone departure from the overexposed virtual reality consuming MLB's regular season.  Especially in Arizona, where we enjoy an embarrassing glut of live baseball ten months each year, and where six months of Daron Sutton broadcasts are already five too many.

thrilling climax and denouement >>>

Name That Franchise

Arizona Diamondbacks. What does that even mean anymore?

The organization's original, inclusive vision extended the triple AAA club, as well as spring ball, to Tucson, our state's second largest metro. Jerry Colangelo, who still resides off Thomas Road in central Phoenix, wanted to exploit the southern market and brand the club across the state. 

But after the franchise father was disowned, his successors severed the last limb of this statewide vision. The independent minor league squad recently relocated to Reno. Then, Paradise Valley residents, Ken Kendrick and Derrick Hall, abandoned Tucson entirely for greener casino pasture, just west of their private mcmansions. The audacity with which Arizona's indigenous team circled its wagons in Scottsdale, before the adolescent TEP was even paid off, begs the question whether the broad 'Arizona' appelation applies anymore.

thrilling climax and denouement >>>

The Price of Loyalty

Not 24 hours after Anaheim's "day in the sun" went dark, reports are trickling in about 25% price hikes @ Chase Field, presumably tied to the ephemeral 2011 All Star Game. Dback brass have yet to confirm the regular season increases, but loyal season ticket holders are understandably livid.



Consecutive last place, non-competitive seasons. Most signs point to Kendrick further slashing payroll into 2011. Knowledgeable Keith Law surmises this ownership group wont contend "anytime soon". Employment and personal income are down in the Valley, and Derrick Hall's "fan friendliest" front office is raising prices? Again.

On azcentral.com, two presumable package holders report that their account reps informed them a pair of "Infield Reserve" uppers will increase $332 annually, when the invoice arrives later in August. For them, that's a 25% increase. An extortion tax, apparently, for the privilege of getting in line to buy ASG tickets - at MLB's All Star prices.

With seasonal attendance dwindling, this is how Derrick Hall rewards his most loyal fans? Stick with us, he implored, even while our product disintegrates. We're in this together, he cheerfully implied. Then, at the nadir of public confidence in franchise stewardship, he slams a $332 cover charge on his most price sensitive loyalists?

Stop and think who buys upper deck season tickets to watch the Diamondbacks. These arent corporations and law firms. I did meet an MD up there once, but for the most part they're teachers, tow truck drivers and customer service reps, who breathe baseball and suffer with the team. Many bring their own food to the game. These are the fans stuck with an ultimatum, courtesy of Derrick Hall and Ken Kendrick:

We've strung you along for years with the hype of a made-for-TV All Star Game, that is rapidly losing appeal, and which still may never materialize in Phoenix.

You've supported us through the bad times. We dont really care if you purchase expensive ASG tickets or not. That's a separate issue. Just be a good fan and go write us another check for three hundred bucks, or you can kiss your season tickets goodbye.

Sincerely,

The New Diamondbacks Family

P.S. - We're building a championship team, just for you. Dont miss out!

Room For Two

After navigating the toughest month of opponents in franchise history, skipper AJ Hinch has predictably been dismissed. Less predictably, he took the General Manager with him. Like Bob Melvin's ouster a year prior, the timing of the firings, relative to the seasonal schedule, leave little doubt as to the short term impetus or curious integrity of the changes.

If you recall, Melvin was axed immediately after surviving a 29 game stretch against almost exclusively .500 or better teams, ushering in Hinch to face the then hapless Nats and Reds at home - and one of the easiest extended stretches in recent memory. Today, Hinch endured a brutal interleague schedule to make way for Kirk Gibson, who will be greeted by 17 of 20 at home against lesser foes. After that, the schedule trends even easier, if that's possible. Sound familiar?

The other parallel involves tangential effects. Melvin's dismissal didnt stir much outrage, at least outside the clubhouse, but did lead directly to the departure of Bryan Price. Today, most everyone is relieved to see Hinch exit, but the absence of Josh Byrnes may prove more strategically problematic.

Byrnes, it is rumored, is the early odds on hero in all this, standing by his man, a la Tammy Wynette. Just kidding. I think it's actually damn dignified and a pretty rare thing to do. To punt a high profile baseball job, because you really believe in someone you think is getting a raw deal.

Just ask Bryan Price.

Longer term, jettisoning AJ Hinch is a good thing, although not as good as never inserting him in the dugout in the first place. The clubhouse vibe, which he was hired to improve, never did, and in fact badly deteriorated. Reportedly, the relationship between Byrnes and Hall had also grown strained. That's what happens when you put a marketing careerist ostensibly in charge of a substantive baseball mind competing under tight fiscal pressures.

The marketing careerist won and I'm not sure that's a good thing for the franchise.

What easily gets lost in all this shifting, is that Melvin and Hinch both had their clubs objectively playing better just before they were dropped. That doesnt mean AJ should've ever been hired, or that Melvin was a great manager. But both teams had settled down, with clearer skies ahead. That contextual performance tends to fall by the wayside, however, when what matters most to the leaders of an organization is manipulating fans and perception. When what's more important than fielding a good team is telling you how good it is. When what trumps winning is manipulating personnel so you can take credit for anticipated bumps a softer schedule affords.

I fear that's what this organization has largely become. It's defining character seems to be perception, rather than substance, driven. Hinch and Byrnes were party to that, at times, and received criticism here. So, I harbor mixed feelings about both of them. But in the end, seeing how their respective if not always respectable tenures played out to the bitter end, it's hard to escape my impression that each young man, in his own way, was probably a little too good for the room.

Fans Speak: Hall's Off The Field Superlatives Fall Broadly Short

While its methodology has been skewered more often than pineapple and shrimp, ESPN's latest franchise rankings still furnish valuable data about the Dbacks, if you poke for it. Their eighth annual survey ranks franchises in the four big sports, based on national fan input on half a dozen "satisfiers" - and a couple other tabulations.

On the face of it, the Dbacks come across quite well, ranked #26 out of 122 North American franchises. Expect the likes of Derrick Hall and Jim McLennan to trumpet this finding as evidence of organizational substance and vision. But looking closer, and I hope more meaningfully, one finds pretty much the opposite.

Meaningfully? Well, what's the value of comparing baseball teams to the Buffalo Sabres or Cleveland Browns? When baseball enjoys inherent affordability advantages and each sport cultivates its own brand of customer. In addition, ranking franchises across markets and sports (ie product) simultaneously creates excessive statistical noise. In order to more accurately evaluate the Dbacks, we need to filter out the other three sports.

Just baseball teams. The Dbacks still look pretty good. Eighth out of thirty teams. But is this proof they're doing a marvelous job? Or is there something else we can control for? There is! We can control for market, by eliminating the other 29, and comparing recent poll results with earlier in-market numbers. Apples to apples, or about as close as we can get - Phoenix to Phoenix. No skewing "noise" from entrenched bicoastal negativity; the Dodgers and Red Sox for example, and both pairs of teams from New York, all finished in the lower half of these rankings. Yes, the World Champion Yankees ranked 16th! Phoenicians are generally much easier to please. So let's control for that, mindful that each year's rank really reflects previous year's performance (ie the 2010 survey was conducted prior to the 2010 season, and reflects previous attitudes.)

ESPN first polled fans early in 2003. How did we do?

In terms of overall satisfaction, the Dbacks ranked first in baseball. The next year they ranked second. Even in the 2005 survey, reflecting a hostile ownership takeover and 111 loss season, the Dbacks (run by Colangelo through July and Kendrick the rest of the year) polled ninth. Five years later, Hall's rank of 8th doesnt sound quite so impressive, does it?

Let's look at polling components. My favorite is "affordability". Again, Arizona currently ranks eighth, which is about where I think they objectively belong (in MLB's lowest per capita income market) - but still a fair distance from Hall's largely unchallenged "lowest prices in baseball" ideology.

Wait, it gets better. Colangelo raised prices every single year. Wouldnt 2002-03, right after the World Series and a 98 win season, be the perfect opportunity for him to really gouge the base? In 2003, they ranked fatcat Jerry seventh in affordability - better than the talkative Hall's best mark! You have to laugh. For years, Hall has harangued locals about his superlative values in a half empty ballpark. Colangelo never claimed he had baseball's lowest prices. Saying so, over and over, would've been beneath him. He provided utility instead.

Additionally, year-to-year affordability numbers paint an instructive picture of when local fan utility actually fell of the cliff.

2003 - 7th Colangelo
2004 - 10th Colangelo
2005 - 12th Colangelo/Kendrick
2006 -19th Kendrick
2007 -18th Kendrick
2008 - 8th Kendrick
2009 - 9th Kendrick
2010 - 8th Kendrick

As mentioned, Jerry incremented prices every year, and fan utility was slipping, so that by the time Kendrick took over they had dropped to about twelfth. But look at 2006, which represents Kendrick's first full year at the helm. It was then - and not before then - that affordability took its sharpest plunge in franchise history. 2005-06 is when Kendrick and Moorad jacked individual game prices by 30-150% while fielding losing teams, and it's from THAT policy that Kendrick and Hall have been trying to win back fans. Not some corporate fantasy about Colangelo previously fracturing or alienating the fan base. He played a part, but a relatively small part in that transitional fracture.

Here's year to year "Ownership" data:

2003 - 2nd
2004 - 3rd
2005 - 13th Jerry? Ken? some shared dissatisfaction likely
2006 - 14th
2007 - 18th
2008 - 7th
2009 - 21st
2010 - 14th

Pretty similar. The big drop here was captured early in 2005, after the ownership transition, the Backman fiasco,etc. I'm probably being kind to Kendrick, attributing the town's negative feelings to "shared" dissatisfaction, but hey, that's the sort of guy I am.

Let's close out with a couple nuggets. Starting this year, ESPN expanded the ownership category into subclasses and ranked them as well. One subclass is ownership "honesty". I was interested in what fans felt about this, since we enjoy the most objectively "accessible" team executive in baseball, Mr Derrick Hall. Derrick is justly famous for chatting with fans, disgruntled or otherwise, and the Diamondbacks promote the image that they are the most responsive, communicative, "fan friendly" franchise in sports.

Despite, or maybe because of those efforts, they scored below league average in honesty. And this was before this summer's debacle, when Derrick defined and defended his "championship-style" team. Ouch. Maybe if he just let fans judge his product and pricing on its own terms, like they did under Colangelo and did in these surveys, he might've scored higher. Instead of, you know, trying to fool everyone and make them feel stupid for not fully appreciating his oversold and disappointing product. It's a cautionary lesson, I think, about the difference between quantity and quality of business communication.

Lastly, there's an ownership sub-category on Community Involvement. The Dbacks do better here, scoring 12th. Nothing wrong with that, except for Hall's lofty suggestions they're the most charitable and involved in baseball. Memo to Hall: the people you're reaching out to, those benefitting from your vision, think you're closer to middle third. Dont take my word for it. They're just sayin'.

The Times, They Are A Fakin'

Josh Byrnes, last week in The NY Times:

In a market like ours, we have to be disciplined with managing our payroll...

Market not only implies disadvantage, but an external, static handicap beyond franchise control. To be fair, he's talking to a New York reporter, covering the biggest, most lucrative market in the sport, but for an articulate spokesman like Byrnes, there probably are more accurate nouns than "market" at his disposal.

ESPN.com's Rob Neyer picked up on this. Here's his response to that portion of the Byrnes interview:

I'm not exactly sure what Byrnes means when he references "a market like ours" as if that were a bad thing. Last year the Phoenix metropolitan area was the 12th most populous in the United States, and growing incredibly quickly (sure it's a desert, but land is cheap and people are incredibly short-sighted); within a year or two, the region will break into the top 10.

Maybe the corporate support isn't there and maybe retirees won't pay top dollar for tickets and the people are definitely not concentrated within 20 minutes of the ballpark. But the Diamondbacks do not have a population problem.

Neyer's not exactly right either. There's conflicting evidence as to whether Phoenix is growing at all right now. It's certainly not growing incredibly quickly, like it has for a long time. But it's a substantial, spread out metro. The spread out challenge has been mitigated by improved freeways and signature light rail.

Corporate support has dwindled due to the economy and waning baseball utility. The Diamondbacks predictably responded by going where the money is, much like bank robber Willie Sutton, and heavily tied their enterprise to casino interests. As far as paying "top dollar" for tickets, the expensive box seats at Chase Field dont drive the vacancy issue. It's the mid to low range seats that Phoenicians feel are too high.

So, if selling your most expensive seats arent a real problem, and eager casinos are bankrolling your new stadium and half of what's in the old one, is it really "the market" disciplining your payroll? Relative to New York? Yes. Relative to most other MLB cities? Probably not. If fans arent buying enough tickets, can it really be tied to "market" if Colangelo sold substantially more tickets - to a younger, smaller metropolis with inferior public transport?

What's disciplining payroll isnt "market" nearly so much as "budget", which implies similar disadvantage, but not nearly the same determinism. A budget is a dynamic function of external and internal considerations. Ownership discretion and input are clearly implied, as are financial pressures stemming from a variety of internal actions, like bad contracts and fielding barely competitive teams.



The thrust of organizational advocacy is to make your boss look good. If you cant make him look good, like on the field, then you at least try to make him sound good in the papers. That's what this is about. Subtlely deflecting responsibility from Josh's bosses, and frankly, from himself.

As Neyer indicated, the Diamondbacks dont suffer from particularly unusual external challenges. It's an internal credibility issue that plagues them, that by dancing around with The New York Times, is becoming more "external" every day.

Corridors of Change

Some years ago, the Yankees visited town for a set. An average of 48,200 inhabited BOB's rafters. It wasnt the World Series. It was 2004, amid a most trying season when they dropped 111 games.

Fast forward six years, to a metro Phoenix at least ten percent larger, serviced by a popular light rail system that whooshes by the stadium entrance every seven minutes or so. Colangelo's inheritors have, for years, insisted they proffer the lowest prices in baseball. And into this accessible bargain basement march the defending world champs, baseball's rock star roadies.

We only average 46 and change, on the rising tide of these Gotham gushers. Energetic crowds, who enjoyed an entertaining, closely contested series. But never has the ballpark on Jefferson been so overrun by alien foes of humanity (excluding in-game host "Mike" and one Trace Adkins concert).

At least we didnt hear claims of a sellout, as we so often do from Derrick Hall, when thousands of his most loyal, valued chameleons instinctively dress as dark green, hard molded plastic seats. Did he simply forget to bend the truth this time? More likely, he's too busy orchestrating a far bigger sellout, as his Dream Team feverishly co-opts a history they strategically discounted for half a decade.

They methodically demonized the father of that history, in the papers and on TV, even after they fired him. They blasted his business acumen and ethics. They snickered at his out of date, paternalistic culture. They denigrated the stadium only he was able to realize and from which they now hold court. They obliterated any vestige of brand continuity and the uniforms of a World Series champion. They not so casually denigrated fans' two irreplaceable heroes, Luis Gonzalez and Randy Johnson. And they denigrated fans themselves, chastising Phoenix for not supporting second and third rate teams and for not understanding the game or the daunting onus of keeping a franchise afloat in what they've disingenuously painted as an unusually challenged market.

Under the stands, there's a corridor, between the dugout and the clubhouse, through which all Diamondbacks pass. After practices, losses, wins. Even championships. One of the walls was purple and players wrote stuff on it. Left their personal marks for posterity, year after year. It was the players' wall and became a sentimental connection for some, between each other and between their ephemeral athletic selves and the concrete permanance of a stadium and a franchise.

Yes, the usurpers painted it over. Sedona Red. It sounds like a small thing, a petty thing to do or even to get upset about. Nonetheless, a startlingly tone deaf and unnecessary directive, with significant repurcussions. More important than the act itself was the indelible knowledge that a new leadership team would even want to do something like that.

It's not the only reason players here have been looking over their shoulders, and looking out for themselves, ever since. But it's one of many slights, triggering a toxic and ongoing disconnect between Kendrick/Moorad era management and players. When management casually disregards players feelings and paints over their little piece of immortality, players tend to perform with all the heart of a contractor or temporary worker.

A more recent, tone deaf directive was the shockingly insular hire of AJ Hinch. Same ivory tower disregard for player input or feelings. Same resulting morale issues. Same "inexplicably" discouraging results.

I guess the easy metaphor is about walls, of which there are now so many, stifling this organization. But the resonant metaphor, especially now, is really about painting things over. Kendrick, Moorad and MLB didnt just oust Colangelo to realize a better rate of return. Kendrick, in particular, was so angry at Jerry's spending that he felt compelled to paint over - literally and figuratively - the very creation and accomplishment that the spending brought.

Unfortunately for him, the creation he systematically obscured, to get back at Jerry, was the creation this city identified with, more than anything he's managed to create on his own terms, since. It must be an extraordinarily bitter pill for Kendrick, not just because he strutted around for years about how he was going to outperform Colangelo on the field, but moreso because Kendrick himself quietly funded a good chunk of the inaugural success.

After failing to field more than one team that outscored it's competition (barely), in six tries, the artist formerly known as Pious Earl has his paint brush out again. With another season and the fanbase escaping him daily, Kendrick has instructed his minions to suddenly embrace the purple past, with a frenzied lack of subtlety for which they are justly famous. Perhaps we'll explore the gaudy limits of this strategic deflection at a later date, after we've caught our breath and stopped holding our sides from laughter.

What's important to note for now, is that even the transparent dolts at azcentral.com see right through this similarly transparent charade. You cant obscure and obliterate the past at every turn for half a decade, then use that same past to suddenly obscure your unpalatable present. Well, I suppose you can try. These are, after all, people with a comically low opinion of their customers. They can continue to brush all they want, but that underlying contempt for fans hasnt changed, and will require more than another coat of paint.

Dbacks Less Affordable

Axing non subscription TV games and Colangelo's dollar seats apparently didnt satisfy Paradise Valley residents, Ken Kendrick and Derrick Hall. Today, in answer to the harshest recession in memory, baseball's "most affordable" and self proclaimed fan friendliest front office jacked their cheapest Chase Field ticket yet another 60%.



That comes to eight smackers for deep corner nosebleeds; nine if you hazard the audacity to purchase your ticket on gameday. I know, I know. Eight or nine dollars, even in this economy, isnt much, right? One cant expect a professional franchise to give away seats for less than that.

A few points.

For most people, eight or nine dollars isnt much, but most people also have little regard for accomodations this far above the earth's crust. Folks who sit up there, in a half empty venue are, by definition, price sensitive.

Two, as Diamondhacks brought to the sporting public's attention several years ago, Phoenix Metro bears the lowest median personal income of any major league city.

Third, and most importantly, this isnt any franchise jacking up prices on those least able to afford it. It's the club which has aggressively and inaccurately marketed itself as the most affordable in the game, three years running.

Just for fun, I putted around mlb.com to see if another ballclub charges less than eight dollars:

Cleveland $7 super value game

Detroit $5

Kansas City $7

LA Angels $5 (child only), same with Pitt $6 but child only

Yankees $5 Obstructed view bleacher

Oakland A's $2 Wednesdays + $1 dogs, includes Yanks, Red Sox

Seattle $7

Texas $6 adult, kids as low as $3

Atlanta $6 Premium $8

Cincinnati $5 incl premier, $7 regular bleachers

Colorado $4 Rockpile, incl Boston, premier, opening day

Houston $7, $1 children 14 and younger, dynamic pricing as well

San Diego $5 Park Pass

San Fran - dynamic pricing as low as $5

Washington $5 small section, day of game sales only

Essentially half of major league teams currently offer cheaper single game options than our self styled Arizona Altruists. Even the notoriously expensive Cubs sell $8 tickets at six designated "bronze" games, over at Wrigley. Maybe it's not outrageous for the Dbacks to charge eight dollars, however given the recession, oversupply of seats and local market history, I'd characterize an eight or nine dollar cover charge to gain entree to Chase Field as rather high. What's outrageous and cloying, it seems to me, is for the people behind such pricing to call themselves the most fan friendly front office - and to trumpet their "product" as the most affordable in the game.

Re-examining Webb

Few body parts were examined more in 2009, physically or vicariously, than Brandon Webb's right labrum, but to better understand why he didnt pitch past Opening Day, perhaps one needs to apply the scalpel to conventional wisdom as well.

Or, since this is Diamondhacks, a hammer with blood on the claw should suffice.

Interested parties agree Brandon frayed his labrum, and Diamondhacks editors acknowledge there's a physical issue. No one cuts a magic arm if there's not. But convention further assumes the resulting impingement and pain prevented him from pitching all but the first game last season. We think there's more to it than that. What's never been clear is the severity and functional significance of the injury. Was it sufficiently incapacitating to retire Webb for the season? Or did other factors play into Brandon's decision to sit out 2009?

Let's speculate, for example, that Webby was interested in maximizing career earnings. Sounds crazy, I know, but imagine that was on the unassuming Kentuckian's mind. How might he approach the second half of the 2008 season, immediately after the $54M extension was pulled in June? Secondly, how might he approach the 2009 season, a full ten months after the deal was aborted, ostensibly due to insurance "flags".

The first question seems pretty easy to answer. Webb finished 2008 very strong, going 10-3 with a 3.38 ERA. Does that sound like a physically or psychologically compromised pitcher? Or a healthy, motivated Brandon Webb? Webb appears to have sublimated (or channeled) any lingering anger or disappointment over the contract, by pitching up to his own superlative standard for the remainder of the season.

But what about the spring of 2009? After that affirming second half and a long off season to ruminate. What was his reward for keeping the mediocre Dbacks in the 2008 NL West race, and keeping most of his personal disappointment out of the papers? It was not $54M - or anything resembling that. His reward was $5.5M and the presumable satisfaction of a job well done. Tall cotton for most of us, to be sure, but our established skills dont annually command $15-20M on the open market.

Let's bludgeon that point a moment. After 2008, Webb had accumulated approximately $13.5M in career salary, and according to fangraphs.com his open market value during that time exceeded $80M. That's not necessarily the Diamondbacks' fault - it mostly reflects MLB's salary structure, which generally underpays young stars and overpays tenured veterans. But the purpose of this exercise is to get inside the head of an athlete who, for whatever reasons, was systematically and grossly underpaid in terms of his career production.

An athlete who finally got teased with pay roughly commensurate with performance, and then had that hope quashed by privately held "medical concerns" subject to considerable interpretation. A proud athlete who put all that aside to vastly outproduce his earnings for an additional three months. As he had his entire career.

What was Brandon Webb thinking that winter. Maybe he thought he proved the front office wrong. Maybe he thought the Diamondbacks would finally recognize and reward him as one of the game's most durable aces. He had just capped three consecutive Cy Young caliber seasons, going 22-7 and was - for all intents and purposes - the fourth highest paid starter on the club. He earned several million less than journeyman Doug Davis, barely a third of Randy Johnson's 2008 salary, and lacked the kind of long term extension the club generously granted a younger Dan Haren that August. Webb was pushing thirty years old, arguably the best pitcher in baseball over the previous six seasons...and only Micah Owings made less in the Arizona rotation.

It's hard to exaggerate the extent to which Webb must have felt undervalued, and to some degree, un(der)appreciated, by his employer. And not just in terms of the reneged extension. It must have eventually dawned on Brandon that he was never going to collect that kind of money from the Arizona Diamondbacks. If winning ten of his final thirteen decisions didnt alleviate the brass's medical concerns, what could? That's as good as he can pitch.

If you're 29 or thirty years old, under team control for a couple more years, and feel your employer is never going to pay you anything close to your value, what do you do? One option is you quietly play out your contract. Another strategy is to get away from the Arizona Diamondbacks as quickly as possible. Some athletes demand a trade, badmouth the owner in the papers. Or you can discourage your spendthrift employer from exercising your 2010 option, and a good way to do that is to not pitch. To complain that something you cant quite put your finger on, doesnt "feel good". To elegantly fulfill Jeff Moorad's public prophecy that you present a significant injury risk - and become one.

We're not calling Brandon Webb a faker. We believe he suffered an impingement, and that he and others have pitched through similar soft tissue challenges. Sometime in the winter of 2008 Webb decided it made little sense to pitch through it again in 2009.

Not in Arizona.

Achy shoulder or not, every pitcher possesses a finite number of bullets. Should Webb have pitched his heart out in 2009 for $6.5M, all but insuring he'd pitch in 2010 for $8.5M? Or was it in his career interests to "rest up" in 2009, in hopes the Dbacks passed on his option - opening the door to free agency? Arizona opted to keep Webb, of course, but was that a reasonable way for Webb to perceive things and manage his career? To perhaps rationalize that the front office "owed" him a great deal in unpaid production anyway, to save some bullets and hope for better luck (ie fairer pay) elsewhere.

Reasonable skeptics may doubt that sitting out a season would enrich a player, but due to Arizona's contractual control and established aversion to paying their best players near market value, Webb would gain more by jettisoning the Dbacks a year early, than he'd lose due to generic injury concerns. Dont think so? Ben Sheets sat out 2009 and just signed for $10M plus - and doesnt have the durability or reputation Brandon enjoys. As a free agent, Webb would have garnered far more than the $8.5M he's earning in Arizona.

Even if Arizona picked up the option, Webb saved himself a year's worth of bullets, presumably to shoot another day, under the auspicies of a more generous front office. Today he finds himself in a genuine contract year, however. In terms of monetary reward, it makes sense for him to pitch well on the brink of free agency. A one year hiatus, followed with a stellar, post-surgery year should put most GM concerns to bed, whereas back to back seasons out of commission, or ineffective, could severely diminish Brandon's earning power.

This is good news for Diamondback fans. Well, bad news for fanboys clinging to the fantasy that our beloved Webby would run through brick walls for this organization - and by extension, for us - until retirement or death. But good news for adults, for realists, who understand that professional performance involves so much more than appearances. Convention would have us believe that Brandon Webb's 2009 spirit was willing, but the flesh was weak. We think that's essentially upside down - the flesh was worn but relatively able, and our hero's rational desire, spirit if you will, was systematically compromised.

Local Teams Win, Dbacks Whine

Despite half a decade of lobbying that the Phoenix market presents unusual competitive challenges for pro sports teams, it turns out that every local sports team is winning handily - except the lobbyists crying themselves to competitive sleep - the Arizona Diamondbacks.

The football Cardinals are 5-3 and appear poised for another exciting playoff appearance. The Suns have bounded from the stifling confines of this godforsaken midmarket to the NBA's very best record (7-1). Even the talent-poor Coyotes, mired in bankruptcy and management-inflicted woe, are 10-7, thanks to gritty defense and superb goaltending. In light of this overwhelming local success, would mentioning the Mercury's second WNBA title this October be piling on?

Everyone in this 'challenged' market is winning, except the doomsday Diamondbacks. More than a barrage of familiar excuses, however, separate success from our last place baseball team. Each winning franchise recently hired a respected coach who instantly improved team performance and culture -Ken Whisenhunt, Alvin Gentry and Dave Tippett. Contrast these intelligent, results-driven changes with the esoteric, politically motivated hire of AJ Hinch, whose floundering arrival divided and profoundly discouraged players, all but ensuring a season of collective failure.

Perhaps if Earl Kendrick managed his largely inherited baseball resources more astutely, another winner might emerge, against his incredible odds, from this hardscrabble market of his singular imagination.

Out of Town Scoreboards

This time of year, normal Phoenicians have long since tired of what the usual opinionistas profess did in our local nine. Derrick Hall looks to injury and happenstance, Levski targets the EB contract, and my dear friend Jim McLennan blames Colangelo, stupid fans or anyone other than Jim's put upon franchise princelings. This blog, Diamondhacks, ID's pretenders undermining not just our NL West chances, but Western civilization itself.

So there you have it. We know where everyone stands. Or bends. Let's fill our lungs, instead, with some fresh air from beyond our well dug trenches. From Andrew Baggerly, for example, an SF Giants beat writer. Keep in mind, "beats" normally come down more critically on the orgs they cover every single day. Three days v. the Dbacks apparently made quite an impression.

Baggerly:

The Arizona Diamondbacks are a hot mess. I used the word “dysfunctional” in my game story, but only because I write for a family newspaper.

The players don’t appear to hustle or care, they make embarrassing fundamental errors and almost every inning, you get the sense they’ve never scouted their opponent or pay any attention to detail. I suppose that’s what happens when you replace your manager with your farm director in the name of “organizational advocacy.” (And while I don’t know much about A.J. Hinch, it’s pretty clear a Stanford degree only gets you so far.)

Let’s put it this way. If a runner is standing at third base with less than two outs, the game situation often compels you to play the infield in, right?

When that runner is Bengie Molina, uhhhh… not such a smart move.

The most embarrassing part was when pitching coach Mel Stottlemyre Jr. went out to talk to Dan Haren, got snippy when plate umpire Hunter Wendelstedt tried to move things along, and ended up getting tossed. Then Hinch got tossed, too.

All the while, Haren was standing on the mound, getting cold. Brilliant stuff, boys.


Another out of towner, Spink Award winner Tracy Ringolsby, rumors the reeling Dbacks are for sale. One can certainly pray. His unsourced tidbit drew a blustery denial from Earl "Ken" Kendrick, the moralist legally squabbling over Jeff Moorad's outgoing share, while preaching he's not in baseball for the money.

Kendrick:

"It's a complete and total fabrication of the highest order. That's [selling the Dbacks] the last thing on my mind."

Well, hardly the last thing, given recent sale of another major league franchise all but confirmed "the last thing" on Kendrick's mind was his most embedded partner's vigorous interest in the San Diego Padres.


Ringolsby points out "there is no indication that there have been any serious talks with a prospective buyer...", so he's not floating a baseless rumor that a sale is imminent. He's implying a credible, unnamed source has hinted to him that the Dbacks are "available", open to discussion, etc. Kendrick calls that a complete and total fabrication? It's not much of a story, is it? The idea Kendrick would sit down with a hypothetical buyer? Why would Ringolsby completely fabricate something so mundane out of thin air?

It's true he shares my general disdain for Dbacks brass, and more specificially their hollow cult of organizational aggrandizement, but as a columnist, he's entitled that. The issue isnt who likes who - it's whether there's anything to the sale rumor and who's telling the truth.

We dont know the answer, but I would ask two questions pursuant to it.

1. Who sounds more credible, less bombastic here? A high ranking journalist who claims the Dbacks are "available" but there's no evidence of any serious sit downs, or an owner who dismisses such tame talk as "a complete and total fabrication." How could Kendrick possibly know what others have confided in Ringolsby to make such a sweeping indictment?

2. Who's got the larger potential conflict of interest? A very well-connected journalist relaying an unsourced aside, or the owner of an unstable $400M concern, worried about his position amid rumor he wants out? Who has more to gain by hiding the truth for their own profit?

Perhaps Jeff Moorad could shed some light on the subject.

If a bat falls in a forest...

While Mark Reynolds ran rings around history with his forest of strikeouts, tonight's FSN gamecast branched off to a most curious question:

If Mark whiffs and no one hears it, does it make a sound?

In the fourth inning, Reynolds logged the all time seasonal strikeout record (205) and, amazingly, Daron Sutton and Mark Grace didnt utter a peep. They knew he did it, but not a word.

I understand the batter's K mark isnt as noteworthy as the seasonal home run record or the pitcher's strikeout mark, for that matter. I understand Mark's having a terrific season and doesnt want to be 'defined' by strikeouts. I understand this is a strikeout era and his record may be broken soon enough by someone else. I understand many of history's greatest hitters struck out a great deal, and an increasingly popular school of thought suggests K's are no worse than any other outs.

I even understand that Daron and Mark are company employees and not real journalists.

I get all that.

But regardless of how Reynolds wants to be defined or should be defined, this century old sport remains defined, at least in part, by numbers and records. It's the coin of the realm. The frame of reference - and Mark Reynolds just broke one of the frame joists.

Even if there arent real journalists in the booth, the pretense of honoring baseball - especially in Phoenix - lingers heavy in the air. We expect, and deserve, to hear the facts on the field, if not in the clubhouse or front office. This clowning production spends almost half an inning on Todd Walsh fake schmoozing Danny Zelisko for tickets to a fucking Poco concert, then decrees the All-Time seasonal strikeout record isnt worth a mention in real time?

Yesterday, we documented how Sutton steers attention to the game when things go the Dbacks way, and diverts attention when things turn sour. The Game, in its merciless spontaneity, represents Truth, and the organization has fled from that unpleasantry, in favor of overchoreographed, manipulative artiface.

Did you hear Mark Reynolds strike out? Didnt think so.

Never happened. Nothing to see here.

Poco tickets still available.

See No Evil

Barely two years after ceasing to be a viable ballplayer, Eric Byrnes' eponymous TV show is suddenly going off the air. I dont know about anyone else, but now that I cant watch Byrnsie mumbling with his hat on backwards, sippin' a Starbucks, I'm not sure what to do with my time.

In related news, four months after being a viable major league team, the Diamondbacks arent on TV much either. The past few Saturdays have been radio games, granting visual respite from AJ Hinch's AAA rebuilding exercise and the oily accompaniment of Daron Sutton and Todd Walsh.

The game's not on TV tonight either. Instead, FSN is blasting Frank Caliendo's loud and uneven impressions, another tape of Joe Garagiola's ceremony that dominated Sunday's broadcast, Redheads pre-sell coverage, a never ending Todd Walsh indulgence with ticket broker Danny Zelisko, extended japery between Gracie and....wait a second. Is that Barry Zito? Oh, gosh. My mistake. There is a game being televised tonight. Sort of. Oh, and the game's tied in the seventh. Who knew?

Attendance @ The Lovely Morgan has dropped almost 5000 fans per evening since last year, one of the largest % and numerical drops in the sport, yet curiously the Dbacks' National League ranking remains eleventh (out of sixteen teams) - same as 2008.

Even with light rail and a summer of Phoenicians curtailing out of town vacation travel , this will be the fifth year in a row our team draws more on the road than at home, despite Chase Field's purported "lowest prices in baseball." Colangelo never made such claims, or massaged pricepoints to look better in industry TMR metrics. He just offered higher quality baseball at broadly lower prices, and drew more fans downtown than they did on the road - every single one of his seven years at the helm.

10:30pm -- The Dbackles just dropped tonight's 'contest' to the Giants. The loss puts Arizona four games south of San Diego, with eleven to go. After the game, AJ Hinch called it a night of poor execution and not winning baseball. More accurately, it's been a season of poor execution, with players acquired by JByrnes, developed and managed by Hinch.

Bob Melvin won 90 games and went to the 2007 NLCS with Doug Davis and Livan Hernandez as his #2 and 3, and a bunch of rookies and journeymen in the field. He got fired, presumably, for finishing two games off the pace in 2008, and falling 4.5 back of the wildcard in May of this year. Derrick Hall termed this five months 'gross underperformance'.

In his five months, AJ Hinch has rocketed out of contention faster and farther than anyone imagined, far worse than Melvin ever did with this rough core of players. As the brass defends AJ's hire under these circumstances, making excuses for AJ when they made mincemeat of Melvin, one can hardly escape what unprincipled phonies run our newly entrenched, last place Arizona Diamondbacks.

Seeing Red

After decimating Jerry Colangelo's fan base with five years of front office aggrandizement and second division play, pious franchise stewards swallowed some pride and finally raised a ghost from the era they eradicated - to salvage what's left of their own withered following.

It wasnt supposed to be this way. Once Ken Kendrick floated unsolicited steroid allegations about Luis Gonzalez in 2006, and Jeff Moorad (Gonzo's former agent) declined to even discuss a contract with the aging franchise icon, the die was cast. Gonzalez questioned the club's vision, ripped the colors, and lawyerly club princelings responded by effusively praising his on and off the field contributions while casting him as a self-absorbed malcontent.

Kendrick's preference was that holdover Gonzo was gone for good. His hand-picked Dream Team would vie for championships on the cheap, on the strength of their guile and character (in Kendrick's self-image), and fans would finally see that crowns dont require Jerry Colangelo or overblown spending, and laud Kendrick for his acumen and leadership.

They would wear red, paint the stadium red and distance themselves as far as possible from everything Colangelo (well, except for inexpensive talent they quietly inherited and consistently assume credit for: Brandon Webb, Mark Reynolds, Stephen Drew, Dan Uggla, Carlos Quentin, Scott Hairston, Montero and Snyder, and one could even argue, Justin Upton).

Anway, the plan was to outdo the purple era, needle it on occasion, and take credit for a superior vision. If an ornery purple primadonna made extension demands, then screw him. We dont need Luis Gonzalez. We'll make people forget Luis Gonzalez.

Except they do and they didnt, and tonight is awkward proof. Even the petty Dream Team knows that now. They are assured of wangling the five lowest seasonal attendance figures in franchise history - in five years! - and are keen to avoid their low water mark of 2005. Friday night, they failed to draw 27000, as the Valley opted to watch a preseason football exhibition instead. Welcome to the Dream Team's wake up call.

Trotting out Gonzo should help. They've designed scarlet t-shirts with Gonzo's likeness for the occasion - to co-opt his steadfast popularity and foster the illusion they ever gave a damn about those who built their franchise. Look for the shirts, won't you? For the first time in Diamondbacks history, seeing red may be entirely appropriate.

Back To The Future

Last week was Jersey Boy's 15th birthday, so I moseyed over to Marshall's with my $20 bill, and bought a couple red team shirts emblazoned with his local pro sports heroes. This latter day Marshall plan was interrupted, however, by something intriguing in the mens' department - an unfamiliar, dare I say "fresh", assortment of purple Diamondbacks apparel.

What's up with that? Sure, the discounter derives inventory from other stores, explaining some time lag, and due to existing vendor contracts, perhaps sporadic purple got produced shortly after the Dbacks' September 2006 bombshell. But didn't the Dream Team famously discard franchise colors three years ago?

Thanks to my wife, I'm scarily familiar with "vintage" Dback clothing, but these designs looked different. One featured a 1960's era starburst vaguely reminscent of the Jetsons and font like some LA Dodger signage. It begs the question whether this is really old stuff that never sold, or newer product intended to exploit the 'retro' market. Not brand new, necessarily, just designs authorized sometime after autumn 2006.

Given my wife (hardly a crazed Colangelo deadender, like me) scooped up a pair of the white and purple tees (simply thinking they were appealing and new), it's hard for me to imagine this "limited" inventory languishing on Marshall's racks for a year or two.

Did the lawyers who disingenuously trashed the valley's only championship sports brand in 2006, subsequently authorize - and profit from - production of that very brand? I wouldnt be surprised. Who else profits from ticket sales, then brokers secondary sales of the exact same, unused tickets for additional profit? MLB.

Who would cheerfully bury a championship brand in order to turn a short profit from a second identity, then resell the original brand on the side, after even the most malleable fans reject your vision? Look no further than the most "fan friendly" front office in baseball.

In related news, Luis Gonzalez will be displayed Saturday, ostensibly to be "honored", like a bust of Lincoln at a Sarah Palin pep rally. There will be chants, cheers, maybe tears, but not much honorable about it.

Not unless tickets to this opportunistic Back To The Future sequel are free.

Executive Weak

Disenchanted Diamondback fans (are there any other kind?) may look forward to a pair of hot, airy events this weekend. The hapless, cost-shedding Pirates are flying into sizzling Sky Harbor. And the hapless, fan-shedding Dbacks are launching "Executive Week" on FSN.

No, seriously. You cant make this stuff up. Under the guise of being responsive, even useful, to fans, Derrick Hall and selected spokesmen will commandeer literally hours of postgame air time to sell a disbelieving public on just how marvelous the organization is, from top to bottom. Wait, how silly of me. There is no bottom! It's one great big, continuous Circle of Success. I almost spoke out of turn.

It's hard to tell which is the more inexorable force. The Pirates shedding payroll every summer, or the Dbacks' shedding of fans with an increasingly tone deaf penchant for self-promotion. At least FAA regulations preclude the Bucs from jettisoning pricy veterans while their plane is in transit. The FCC provides no such temporary relief to Arizona fans, yearning for something approaching a normal baseball telecast - or a straightforward front office.

Here's what Hall will probably broadcast (and parenthetically, what he will not):

We've had some injuries (front office decisions arent to blame for the poor record)

We've lost some close games (and we've won close games. The overall record speaks for itself)

We're playing better than before ( a Little League team could play better than we were before)

Dan Haren can win the Cy Young (unlikely, but I'll wake you up every fifth day, just in case)

Mark Reynolds and Justin Upton have emerged (and we still stink)

We have the lowest prices in baseball (except for the Pirates and some other teams)

Fireworks every Friday night ( if it's not the least bit windy, which hardly ever happens on July evenings in Phoenix)

The All Star game is coming ( eventually, along with heat-related medical emergencies)

We're building the best spring training park ever (down the street from our benefactor's 240,000 sq ft casino).

We're doing it for the best fans in baseball ( the ones I recently criticized for disloyalty and not understanding the game).

Another self serving public relations blitz to distract from the unprofessional mess that is this season. Another crafted condescension by entrenched execs to massage their own unsatisfactory performance. Another day in Paradise Valley, Sedona Red style.

Man On The Boon

As front office credibility dwindles, leave it to MLB stooges to spin damage control fluff about the Diamondbacks' core of the future and to prop up Ken Kendrick as some financially responsible franchise savior.

This "financially responsible" Dream Team has been mostly responsible for refinancing (and to be fair, salvaging) their personal investments and for disenchanting the fastest growing major city in North America. Doesnt make them bad people - but it doesnt make them civic minded altruists or praiseworthy franchise stewards either.


Mr Kendrick asserted ownership control and has continued to increase his share at every opportunity, because team value is generally increasing and whether he reports it or not, he's realizing a return - even when (and some might argue, because) the team loses on the field. Colangelo's teams won, but franchise value was relatively flat because of the debt. Different priorities, different dreams, different results.

Ken Kendrick:

"If somebody had told me before the season we'd have lost Webb and Jackson, I'd have told them we'd be lucky to finish .500"

Diamondhacks:

If someone had told me Dan Haren would hurl like Zeus, Justin Upton and Mark Reynolds would morph into All Stars, Doug Davis and Max Scherzer would sport ERA's in the threes and Jon Garland's park adjusted ERA would hover near league average, I'd have told them no injuries could possibly explain being fourteen games under .5oo.

The fact is, a bunch of good, unexpected things have happened - rendering the front office meme that this year's model is "snakebit" as lame excuse-ism. Worse, it reveals an entrenched reluctance to accept responsibility for their own selfish priorities. Their own small dreams. Their own mediocre results.

In related news, we landed on the moon forty years ago. Or not. You decide.

Phoenix had its own Man on the Moon a decade or so ago.

The Philosophy of Organizational Aggrandizement

Before AJ Hinch ever coached a game, Diamondhacks distilled what his auspicious arrival primarily portended. Quite apart from driving tangible improvement, his head scratching hire was wordsmithed and painstakingly timed, to position and ultimately seize organizational credit for generally expected short term performance regressions, following an injury plagued and uniformly disappointing April.




Not a month into Hinch's 12-14 reign (versus weaker foes than Melvin faced), the front office Dream Team unveiled Phase II of its campaign to assume and assign credit for their hand picked Success Agent. Amidst an 8-0 rout of the hapless Padres (projected by many to lose 100 games), play-by-play toadie Daron Sutton dutifuly chimed in that the club is hitting "almost a hundred points higher" with runners in scoring position (RISP) than they did "in their first twenty nine games". This is true (well, seventy-six points [.262 v .186] when he said it, so true "enough"), but this was no impromptu trivia, blurted in the booth to kill time in a laugher.

The less than cryptic "twenty nine games" is a measure of Bob Melvin (12-17), the 2007 NL Manager of the Year-turned-scapegoat, who predated Josh Byrnes and CEO Derrick Hall, and who was Ken Kendrick's reluctant second choice following the West Virginian's self-inflicted Wally Backman debacle. These high class movers and fakers are too classy, it appears, for mouthpiece Daron to actually name the skipper they aimed to implicitly malign last night.

Sutton couldnt simply observe, for example, the team's hitting better "in May than in April", which reflects an even clearer statistical distinction for the public. No, the ponderous '29 games' spiel is their rather purposeful cue that Melvin couldnt manage an offense (and Hinch can) - although it bears mentioning (because Sutton assuredly didnt) that Rick Schu (another Josh Byrnes hire) was hitting coach during this entire inoffensive stretch. Schu, we recall with limited amusement, was this GM's 'answer' to replace Kevin Seitzer, Byrnes' earlier, outside the box, personnel "failure".



If that's all Sutton said, it wouldnt be a big deal, of course. Announcers say stuff like that all the time. In SedonaRedland, however, Daron's riff set up a pre-edited video segment with Jack Howell, this month's hitting guru. Howell emphasized working on batters' weaknesses and, unlike Seitzer, didnt say anything too aggrandizing. That came after, when Sutton proclaimed causality between recent BA/RISP gains and the efforts of Howell and Hinch.

It's not just happening, folks. It's the direct result of a philosophy.

There are substantive and political problems with this tone of declaration. Substantively, the samples are too small to draw that conclusion. The player samples (and circumstances) are also inconsistent. Is Schu culpable for trotting out his most consistent hitter (from 2008) with an undiagnosed case of valley fever? Or savaged for playing Augie and Josh Wilson, when Drew went on the DL? When it suited his agenda, Derrick Hall chirped about how TEP puts the whole team at an April disadvantage - now, the poor April hitting is on Melvin and Schu? How much credit does Howell deserve for a AA callup (Parra) hitting .667 (12/18) with RISP? I dont really know, but the point is, neither does Daron Sutton or anybody else.

The team is undoubtedly hitting better since Melvin left, but it's also a fact the three guys who hit for him (Upton, Lopez and Reynolds) have continued to hit under Hinch, and with the exception of a surging Snyder and reserve Ryan Roberts, the culprits who didnt hit for Bob in April (CY, Byrnes, Whitesell, Montero, even Drew for pity's sake), havent hit much since either. The biggest boost, so far and by far, has been Parra, who never played for Melvin, and Roberts, a 28 year old with a career .074 BA, who's been ethereally raking .400 for Howell. A month of this is being touted as a triumph of coaching philosophy? Seriously?

The more galling component of this quick and very dirty presumption is that Melvin and Schu are somehow responsible for the .186 BA in any meaningful sense; the idea that this young, ascendant offense might somehow be resigned to hit .186 w RiSP under Melvin going forward. Last night, Sutton praised Howell and Hinch for briefly overseeing a .262 RISP at Melvin's expense, despite the fact Melvin's 2008 squad, the one tirelessly lampooned for a lack of clutchness, hit .257 w RISP over an entire season. Talk about a disingenous, statistically insignificant comparison.

Is Daron unaware of such context? A big innocent earnestly trying to educate us, even if he doesnt "get" all the statistical implications?

Hardly.



Sutton himself is intensively 'coached', tutored, by statistical wonks - wizards if you must. Wizards well aware of data's limitations - and no doubt hip to Daron's contrived declaration and the disinformation campaign to come. That's the self-serving political aspect that's to be expected from a Dream Team with a long history of glossing over, and indeed blaming others for, their strategic and tactical missteps. The next time we're subjected to this sort of organizational blather, and I promise it wont be long, understand these sorts of things dont just just happen, folks - it's the direct result of a philosophy.

Managing Illusions

Hinch is such a desperate choice. What does his unusual hire say about our front office? AJ Hinch went to Stanford, which by this point, it's pretty clear is awfully important to Josh Byrnes. The Haverford alum's staff is famously dotted with similarly credentialed grunts from Harvard and MIT. It's not so much that Melvin (Cal) didnt make the grade, it's just telling, that for all the usual candidates milling around with managerial experience - even some within the org - our ivied brain trust opted for a Stanford man who never managed a team in his life.

It's a form of insecurity, and defiance, I think. The idea that "people near Josh" are somehow better qualified to manage a ballclub than, say, people who've managed ballclubs. In a way only "they" can understand. It reminds me of George W Bush's nomination of his personal counsel, Harriet Miers , to the United States Supreme Court, and may reveal an insulated, perhaps even bunker, mentality digging in on Jefferson Street.

The other "statement" here regards so called player development. Hinch was in charge of minor league progress. Melvin was criticised for not furthering those production arcs, most recently by CEO Derrick Hall, who observed the team has "grossly underperformed" for more than five months.

While it's true that regulars, young and old, endured miserable Aprils, the fact is several youngsters blossomed under Melvin's watch. Mark Reynolds came from nowhere to be a serviceable, if errratic, major league starter and is likely to hit thirty homers. Stephen Drew broke out in 2008. Prior to his mysterious ailment, Conor Jackson transformed himself from an inadequate first baseman to a base stealing, left fielding OBP mainstay. Justin Upton, amidst a fourteen game hitting streak, appears to "finally" be on the cusp of superstardom, at all of 21. And Max Scherzer is perhaps the greatest starting pitcher in major league history never to win a game.

Maybe this team has grossly underperformed for five days or weeks (maybe it hasnt), but the claim of five months is predictable, self-serving, front office swill. If Derrick Hall genuinely felt the final four to five months of the 2008 season represented "gross underperformance", wouldnt this winter have been the appropriate time for the newly minted CEO to part with the inadequate Melvin? Why would you stick with a skipper, responsible for nearly a season's worth of "gross underperformance" if you're serious about competing with the Dodgers, with this marvelous, kick ass team of yours? Wouldnt that be counterproductive? To let him screw up April as well?

What's closer to the truth, is that Bob Melvin's being scapegoated for a slow, injury-riddled start and for the strategic "sins" of his bosses. Scapegoated for structurally anemic rosters fashioned by Josh Byrnes and reluctant financier, Ken Kendrick. Scapegoated for pie in the sky fan "experience" and expectations, unabashedly oversold by Hall.

Hall and Byrnes, some may remember, inked two of the lengthiest contracts in the game for themselves. (At the time, only Alex Rodriguez had more job security in baseball). The pair of alarming eight year deals, terms undisclosed, were bestowed by the dynamic duo's mentor, Jeff Moorad, the brazenly conflicted chief of your San Diego Padres. Curious gestures, to say the least, for a GM outscored by opponents during his tenure in a terrible division, and for a CEO leading a firm that doesnt make any profit for its principals. Or so the story's told.

Bob Melvin, or more likely unbelievable short term luck, propelled one of those outscored mediocrities to ninety wins and an NLCS, in one of the game's truly historic anomalies. You'd think that might earn a guy some security. It turns out, about five months worth - three inhabiting first place. Five months of alleged "gross underperformance". Not just poor performance. Under-performance, by Josh Byrnes' brilliant, cant miss phenoms.

The truth is, Josh Byrnes' phenoms have been missing for years. More accurately, our front office has stubbornly misdiagnosed their naturally youthful shortcomings and failed to sufficiently temper that with enough veterans worth a damn. Eric Byrnes had a nice 2007. Orlando Hudson was a solid player. But our leaders failed to pay for, or recognize (Quentin, Uggla, Hairston) significant inherited talent to help Josh's kids with the heavy lifting. Several (Upton, Jackson, Reynolds) were brought up before their time, or in the wrong positions, to save paying established stopgaps a million or three, while the chosen ones muddled along for pocket change. For years, the Diamondbacks front office has cloaked a sorry, shallow collection of veteran positional players behind excellent pitching and an illusion of ready for prime time offensive phenoms who really werent.

Bob Melvin finally took the fall for that illusion, courtesy of entrenched political operators who crafted it and strung it along. They've not only politely blamed Bob for their underlying failures (and deceptions), they've timed his departure to virtually ensure another self-serving illusion: the short term success of their hand-picked replacement. Hinch will open at home, against the league's weakest team, the Washington Nationals (no relation to the Washington Generals apparently), followed by the non-revolutionary Reds.

It's tougher after that, but that should get Hinch off on better terms than if he had encountered BoMel's last dozen opponents (Matt Cain @ home, Cubs @ home [3], at Milwaukee[4], at LA [2], at Jake Peavy and at Chris Tall Young). Melvin went 6 and 6 there, nothing great, but a solid indicator his team is playing better than the 6-11 start to open the season. Justin Upton appears ready to be a franchise player. The pitching staff is one of the best in the league, again. Last year's most valuable position player (Drew) will come off the DL shortly. The team's most valuable pitcher (Webb) may be available after that. Manny is out for 50 games. There is little question the Diamondbacks will play better than their 6-11 start. They already were, and should continue to, regardless of manager. This very public change isnt about playing better ball.

It's about taking credit for it.

I Want You To Want Us

Opening Day is full of little vignettes, and one in the Owner's Box deserves comment before fading from memory. It was there that Luis Gonzalez, in a pale blue golf shirt, sat between Derrick Hall and Ken Kendrick, and was later interviewed by FSN's slightly less indulgent sideline reporter, Mark McClune.

Gonzo said he was there to see about taking on an organizational role, something akin to what Matt Williams was doing, but his words didnt tell the story. His body did. When McClune lobbed ingratiating blather about how happy fans were to see him, Luis would have none of it. He indicated this was the first time he's been at the ballpark since he was let go, and that the owners and him needed to "tie up loose ends". Tellingly, he was not smiling when he said this. In fact, I dont recall him smiling at any time before, during or after the interview, which might be an on camera record for this guy. He sat rigidly between Hall and Kendrick, and all three looked rather uncomfortable to this observer.

It's not known who called the meeting, but I'm guessing the King of Krisis Kommunication, Hall. The Diamondbacks need Gonzo more than he needs them - and let's face it, Hall calls meetings with just about anyone. Besides, Gonzalez looked more like a colonoscopy patient than eager job applicant enthusiastically schmoozing an employer - a natural role if so inclined.

Dressing up Luis Gonzalez in a Sedona Red jersey is something I imagine this front office desperately wants, to help restore a once respectable fan base, since systematically fractured.

*************
Song of the Day - I Want You To Want Me (Cheap Trick)