Disgruntled Employee Punks Lipdub?

For years, locals have been mystified by what practical components could possibly comprise Derrick Hall's "Circle of Success". After all, there's been no objective success, on or off the field, to comprise, encircle or otherwise take credit for. As evidenced by rock bottom play and the lamest local ticket base ever.

Just last month, venerable diplomat Peter Gammons dissed the Dbacks' insular shangri-la, as seen all too clearly on this self-reverential lipdub,as "one of the worst franchises in baseball".

But thanks to what looks like a disgruntled employee (crashing the marketing department's song and dance at the 0:45 mark), we may finally have an answer to our circular question. Reading clockwise from the top, the no longer imaginary circle is comprised of:

Malfeasance

Combover

Culpability

Financial Fakery 

Inexperience 

Dbacks' Contracting Family

For all the frothing Diamondhacks is famous for, it's never taken a shot at anyone in Derrick Hall's family. Or Jim McLennan's. In fact, when a guest here posted such ill-targeted remarks, they were immediately deleted. It's a thick, obvious line that any remotely respectable blog dare not cross.

What I'm about to say stems from longstanding, resigned bewilderment toward this front office, and absent anger:

Derrick Hall just crossed that line.

thrilling climax and denouement >>>

Dbacks Draw 126,000 For Sunday Finale

A record crowd of 126,112 attended Sunday's season finale at Chase Field against the Dodgers, according to CEO/President Derrick Hall.

It is the largest Arizona crowd to witness a sporting event since the third round of the 2006 Phoenix Open at TPC, and the highest attended event ever at Chase Field, which reports a capacity for baseball of 48,295.


"Standing room", explained Hall. "It surprised even us."

The record throng in the half empty stadium enabled the Diamondbacks to barely escape another seasonal low water mark for paid attendance, in what has been a humiliating year on the field, in the stands, on the road, against left handed pitching, across local, national and international political controversies, and against batters.

"Thank goodness for large unconfirmed group sales" said Hall. "This proves we have momentum and are on the right track. Drawing less than 2 million, especially after the Yankees visit, would not have established this kind of momentum. We're very excited about these numbers. And proud"

Previously, the largest Chase Field crowd occured on December 30th, 1999 when 82,450 attended a Rod Parsley miracle and healing service.

What's Wrong With Legends Race?

Legends, l to r: Nomar, JT Snow, Jeff Suppan, Don Mattingly

There's the glaringly obvious - these oversized puppets barely resemble the Diamondbacks in question. The Matt Williams doll looks more like Mark Grace than the Grace version, and Gonzo's schnoz looks alarmingly like Nomar Garciaparra.

The bigger problem is that front office "hangers on" Grace and Williams were about as legendary as Robin Ventura and Al Oliver over their careers. For other teams. By the time they got to Phoenix, they werent even our best players. Exporting the idea they are Dback "Legends" looks provincial and undiscerning and degrades the sport-wide currency of the term. Not to mention the larger franchise contributions of Steve Finley and Curt Schilling.

This decidedly "B" heat that stumbles around during the fifth inning of each home game hardly celebrates our history. It demeans it, by calling attention to the fact that (other than Randy and arguably Gonzo), ours is an immature and understandably shallow superstar heritage.



The Dbacks Legends Race is loosely lifted from popular sausage and President sideline schtick in Milwaukee and DC and captures their generic silliness - but Derrick Hall complicated that by reaching for commercial payoffs with his choice of characters. He's not merely suggesting, inaccurately, that we're a baseball town with four legitimate legends. He's corrupted the very "legends" concept, by favoring and aggrandizing less than legendary figures with current front office associations.

Other cities' races are endearing and ours is so awkward because sausages and Presidents are genuine sources of regional pride - quite apart from baseball. These promos are overtly silly respites from the game - not a barely veiled front office ploy to reconstitute fan affiliations with past franchise glories.

What might have worked better?

Something playfully branding Arizona instead of trying too hard to rebrand a flailing franchise. A race to amuse fans rather than convert them. My idea is a rebrand of the state's historic 4 "C"s - a cowboy, cactus, coyote and feminine cougar, in the modern spirit of the term. Keep it clean for families, of course, but interplay with the cowboy could be entertaining.

Two objections arise. Many locals loathe the tired cactus coyote cliche. Those people are insecure losers. Milwaukee's sausages endure and endear because the local culture's poking a little fun at itself. Saguaros and cowboys are harmless cliches that bond fans and reflect a unique sense of place. Nobody wants to see a trendy foreclosure puppet or racing Intel plant.

Second, some big Mormon investor may object to a coquettish cougar. (In Arizona, it seems big Mormon investors are all over. In fact, the race would be more locally representative if the cowboy was replaced with a Mormon investor, but I digress). The key is to portray the cougar tactfully. Make her work on an innocent level, for kids, and let knowing adults enjoy the innuendo.

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'.

I Back, You Back, Hall & Oates Back Away From D'back Flack, Jack

In eerie juxtaposition to Brandon Webb, 80's pop superduo Hall & Oates have cancelled their 2010 commitment to the Arizona Diamondbacks.

The state's controversial immigration law, SB1070, was cited as probable cause by the timeless and talented purveyors of so called "blue eyed soul".

"I cant go for that", warbled lead singer Daryl Hall.

"mmm...no can do", added the olive complected Oates.

Their postgame performance, originally scheduled for July 2nd, was the brainchild of Diamondbacks president Derrick Hall.

"She's gone", a shaken Hall said of the nixed concert. "We better learn how to face it. She's gone. Ohhh I, I'd pay the devil to replace them. She's gone - what went rawwwng?"

Hinch Ditched For Wagner Card

The holy grail of baseball cards, a Honus Wagner T206 owned by Ken Kendrick, will immediately supplant AJ Hinch as skipper, the Diamondbacks announced today. Hinch has been reassigned.

"We knew when we hired AJ that we were pretty out of the box. Believe me, we knew" Kendrick said. "It didnt work out, so this time I decided to keep our search within the box. Specifically, PSA's lucite casing, which protects my extraordinary Wagner card.

I want two things from a manager. First, dont ask questions when I give a directive. And two, be clean cut. I was pleased with AJ's appearance, the lack of facial hair, but one doesnt need a magnifying glass to see the Flying Dutchman is expertly trimmed as well. "

Team President Derrick Hall also issued a statement:

This latest move is exciting for the franchise and the Diamondbacks' nation of highly valued fans. Our most recent year of gross underperformance was a perception issue among our wonderful fans who are still learning the game, and doesnt reflect negatively on AJ or the outstanding leaders who hired him. AJ is a true difference maker, who developed and managed our fabulous core, without a hint of facial hair.

Kendrick added: AJ was a very clear thinker, but nothing matches the clarity and gloss of my Wagner card. It's a PSA 8 for God's sake, and just jumps off the paper. Take a look! It's hypnotic!

The principal owner was asked if a player card managing a major league team might present problems.

"No. Honus commands respect wherever he goes. We'll display him on the manager's stool, in the dugout, where everybody can see him. I'm confident we'll be fine."

Another Win, Another Irresponsible Deception

Missed the opener, as I was in flight, but the dastardly 'haters' at Yahoo kept me informed, calling into question the fatuous claim of a sellout. Diamondhacks has been documenting similar nonsense for years, but now that national outlets are on board, I guess it might even be true!

Derrick Hall spent the past forty eight hours on local media claiming a sellout. At this point, his fact fudging is old news, at least to this page. The story is how local 'journalists' and outlets let him do it with virtual impugnity.

No Essay Required

Managed an online ticket steal for the April 7th ballgame, but as regular readers have no doubt envisaged, the bargain was not at Chase Field. I'll be in the Bay Area that week and bought three upper deck seats in Oakland - row 6, a little beyond third base - for a total of $17.25. That's in the nation's highest income MSA, by the way, and includes Ticketmaster "convenience" and "service" fees.

How much are comparable online seats in Phoenix - MLB's lowest income MSA? The Paradise Valley altruists touting "the lowest prices in baseball", charge $57.25.

What's the catch? None really. The $57.25 isn't for a "premier" game - that would run $72.25 online and Oakland's Wednesday promotion actually includes premier opponents like the Yankees and Red Sox. The A's run a well advertised deal where, every Wednesday all year long, they designate what looks to be ten to fifteen thousand seats for $2 each. Add in the ugly fees and my $6 purchase grew to $17.25, but I'll save the Ticketmaster rant for another time. It's still a delicious bargain, moreso since Wednesday hot dogs are only a dollar.

It's the sort of straightforward windfall for fans that current Dbacks brass, busy chirping about fans' interests instead of catering to them, would never dream of authorizing. If you want entrance to a mostly empty Chase Field for less than about ten bucks nowadays, be prepared to write Derrick Hall an essay on how you lost your job, or your wallet, or your arm in Iraq. So that he can grant you a couple of unsold uppers and make a televised show out of His largesse - selectively invoking executive privilege to override his own above market pricing.

Forget dollar seats. Forget $2 seats. In the middle of a regional depression, in the lowest income market in baseball, perhaps somebody could invoke executive privilege to bring back last year's five dollar seats, in a half empty stadium. No essay required.

The High Price of Deception

While fans of normal major league clubs anticipate Cactus & Grapefruit League action, word weary followers of the Diamondbacks brace for this spring's iteration of Baseball's Most Byzantine Memo, courtesy of President Derrick Hall. The headline, if history holds, should look something like:

DBACKS REDUCE OR HOLD TICKET PRICES on 84% OF SEATS FOR FOURTH YEAR IN A ROW

The percentage deviates from year to year, but the underlying con job is the same. What the above construction has basically meant, in English, is they raised prices on the 16% of seats sat in by season ticket holders, and raised individual game prices on half a million, unaccounted for, single game buyers. Yeah, I know, that sounds incompatible with the headline, but in spirit, that's what they've done since 2005. Regularly raising prices where fans are most likely to sit - then leveling, and more recently reducing, rates in weak selling sections.

On a fundamental and important level, neoclassical supply and demand, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the last part. It makes perfect sense, actually. What's wrong, and exasperating, is the lengths Dback deciders go to dress up this for profit strategy in a righteous, almost altruistic cloak. One reason, perhaps, is that it uncomfortably contradicts Mr Hall's airy service mantra of "rewarding his most dedicated fans". By reducing prices in only low demand areas, it's generally not diehard package accounts who benefit, but discerning holdouts who may be enticed by select reductions in less than stellar seats.

The larger contradiction is simply the hikes themselves. When you rely on tenuous and misleading "evidence" to brazenly prop your franchise up as "the most affordable in baseball", raising rates every year creates dissonance in your base that must be smothered, spun or simply smiled away.

Single tickets go on sale a week from tomorrow, yet remarkably, not a hint of individual game rates appear anywhere on dbacks.com. Despite grotesquely comic divorces that have compromised Dodger and Padre focus, both found time between sniping and court filings to prominently display prices - and the relatively amicable Rockies and Giants have been hawking regular season tix online for some time.

So why are the Diamondbacks "priceless" and arguably, clueless here? Could they be less customer focused than the Moores and McCourts? Does Mr Hall need extra time to craft this year's intricate crannies within The Memo? Is he the lone priest entrusted to upload this normally rudimentary information to the great unwashed? Is he running behind, or has he temporarily misplaced his remarkable gift of distortion? Hall might be otherwise engaged, managing fallout over the sour choice to abandon Tucson for Casino Park, and his awkward injection into Mesa's proposal to build the Cubs a new spring complex - a performance for which he was roundly pummeled by fans, media and state legislators. Whatever the "priceless" reason, it seems like a curious way to sell tickets.

Which brings us to something else Mr Hall said this week. According to beat writer Nick Piecoro, the CEO relayed that the club's 2010 attendance goal- provided that they win - is 2 million fans. I'm aware the economy is struggling, but this minimum target of theirs is lower than any annual gate realized in Diamondbacks history. Lower than 2005, when certain geniuses decided to increase prices after losing 111 games the year before. A half million lower than 2004 itself. And lower than last season, when the economy, poor play and ongoing value erosion conspired to drop attendance more than 4000 per night. Their goal is to be lower than that? Seriously?

With a team virtually guaranteed to perform better, probably much better, than last year? With the Dodgers and Giants poised for potentially significant regressions? With the Yankees on tap? With [snicker] the lowest prices in baseball? With the golden carrot of the 2011 All Star Game driving package sales? With enormously popular lightrail gliding to and from Chase Field's doorstep - from Mesa, Tempe and points north and west? With a Metro population twice as large as during the Diamondbacks' inaugural 1998 season? I'll say it again, because I know it's important - the economy is very weak. Fair enough.

But a goal of two million, in this town, is still a joke. It's an indictment. Not of fans, who averaged 3 million under Colangelo, whether he won or lost a hundred, without Mr Hall's fireworks, concerts or the city's light rail. In a Valley 20-50% smaller, with prices far cheaper than Moorad and Kendrick's - even after adjusting for the Dept of Labor's and Mr Hall's respective inflations.

In the same chat, Hall unintentionally revealed more on the subject, in that sideways manner of his:

Fans need to have confidence in the talent on the field.

That's true, certainly, and I'd go farther and predict locals will be pleasantly surprised by this year's hardball model. But Hall's tautology distracts from a more troubling, overarching ennui inspired by his "team". Phoenicians lack confidence in this ownership group, whether it be an ability or willingness to fashion a competitive product at market driven prices. In addition, baseball loving Phoenicians dont particularly like this ownership group either, which Diamondhacks has tirelessly (and tiredly!) documented since the rift went public, in 2004.

There's no denying Derrick Hall has ingratiated a personal fan club - encouraged by leadership to distract from unpopular principals, principles and not ready for prime time teams. He works hard at it and his cheerful energy can be infectious in small doses. Look no further than the insular circle of ostensible adults gushing how great it is to have "access" to a club president, who deftly schmoozes them for maximum PR exposure, while Barnuming our much larger, potential market into submission.

The profit from this targeted salesmanship is the adoration of a few hundred fanboys, and maybe a few thousand others, who think Derrick Hall's uncommon enthusiasm and people skills merit allegiance to - or very light treading upon - unpopular policies and methodically dishonest salesmanship.

The price? How much has relentless obfuscation from Hall and phony "entertainment" from talented underlings like Daron Sutton cost this franchise? It's not all their fault certainly, but two million is a nice round number. Where there used to be three.

At the end of this year, Ken Kendrick will have essentially run this franchise for as many seasons as Jerry Colangelo before him. Six years and change. Colangelo created the enterprise from essentially nothing, shepherded it to its greatest competitive heights, and bequeathed a lucrative farm system for his usurpers to exploit and mismanage. Mr Kendrick's legacy? He's managed to stabilize his rate of return by fielding a second division product in an historically weak National League. Yet even today, misguided fanboys parrot boilerplate it was Colangelo who ran "the operation" aground.

It is, at heart, a self interested, corporate deception. Fans in the nation's fifth largest city are on to it, and exacting its price on the appropriate parties.

Proud As A Ruse-ter

If Derrick Hall is "proud" of something, watch out. This gushing sentiment of his almost invariably heralds choreographed ambiguities designed to distract and dupe the public. There was the time, for example, when inveterate abuser Alberto Callaspo knifed his common law wife, hurled their one year old into a headboard, and wore Sedona Red a mere nine days later, prompting Hall to express widespread organizational pride. Or the time Hall cheekily exonerated degenerate Dback fans for throwing bottles at Rockie players in the 2007 NLCS. Or when a fan bemoaned the discontinuation of Jerry Colangelo's popular $1 seats, and Hall responded that he was "extremely proud" of the most deceptive pricing campaign in major league baseball.

So be forewarned. Derrick Hall is proud again. Not quietly prideful, like knowing parents who discretely scrimped to put their kids through college. Proud in the papers, and on radio, of his 'creative' front office that didnt bill those taxpaying parents for the club's latest edifice-on-demand. He's trying to contrast the Dbacks with the Cubs, who are lobbying to impose taxes and ticket surcharges pursuant to a new Mesa complex.

Hall:

They [The Cubs] do draw well, as do we, yet we were creative in our search for a new site to identify a partner willing to finance the entire project without public dollars"

- and -

"....we [Dbacks] can take pride in knowing that the taxpayers are not building it [the Scottsdale stadium]."

Except that's exactly what's happening. According to the Phoenix Business Journal (subscription only), the Salt River Pima-Maricopa tribe:

"... is taking a $23M loan, backed by federal stimulus money, to help fund the $100M project."

Sounds as if taxpayers are integral to the Dbacks' venture, after all. Maybe the tribe is, in Hall's words, "willing" to finance the project without public dollars, but what's more germane, it seems to me, is that they will not actually do so.

Hall's Blackjack Ballpark is backed with A) taxpayer stimulus money, presumably spirited away from projects like hospitals, schools and roads - and B) "private funding" - Hall's highbrow euphemism for gambling profits. Little old ladies throwing away social security checks at the slots - that sort of thing. An industry that, apart from alcohol and drugs, undermines more Arizona marriages, families and dreams than any other addiction. Here, in the middle of a regional depression, that addiction enables the Dbacks' wholly discretionary $100M practice complex, in addition to welcome political cover for their third taxpayer financed stadium in fifteen years. These are the creative funding streams Derrick Hall is "proud" of ? Seriously?

I get how stadiums are financed nowadays. No illusions about that. And I dont begrudge the Diamondbacks, or any other club, their right to oppose the Cubs' latest wrinkle on getting others to spring for their spring home away from home. What rankles me are the adjunct allusions advanced by Hall about his organization's motives and actions - and the generally passive Arizona press that let's him do it, virtually unchallenged.

It's not enough for Hall to simply oppose the Mesa legislation, on grounds it's an unprecedented funding mechanism that would raise Cactus League ticket prices. He has to float the broadly inaccurate dichotomy that the Cubs aim to rely on public funding(!), whereas the Diamondbacks did not. Since when is a $23-30M loan backed by federal stimulus not public funding? Well, technically, I guess it's an indirect subsidy, as the money goes to the tribe, or the bank that loans to the tribe, but it's taxpayer dough facilitating, perhaps even enabling, the project. Does Hall limit himself to that rather sly construction? Not with earnest reporters scribbling away.

"It is frustrating to know that state money was used for the last few complexes that opened, yet funding is now dry for the home team" he said.

Ah, the "home team". Nice. The injustice of it all. Of course Arizona taxes should benefit the Phoenix home team, right? Well, no. Not really, actually. The taxing authority (AZSTA) was established to (among other things) seed the economic engine that is the Cactus League - not Arizona's regular season home team. Indeed, our indigenous Diamondbacks may warrant very low priority in terms of AZSTA funding, for several reasons:

1. Our fans are primarily local and dont drive ancillary spending (entertainment and travel).

2. These "last few complexes" Hall cites, enticed brand new teams to Arizona, generating more games and entirely new interest and revenues to the state. To equate the benefits or investment rationales for Goodyear and Camelback Ranch, with the Dbacks' intrastate move from Tucson to Scottsdale, is highly dubious.

3. The Diamondbacks chose to abandon a taxpayer funded stadium in Tucson that is barely a decade old for "greener" pastures. Hohokam is older. Since the early 1990's, the Angels, Padres and Mariners have managed to survive and/or thrive in older parks than TEP. Phoenix Muni was built in 1964 and the Athletics have called it home for 29 years (although it did get a $8M facelift in 2005). Does the "home team" deserve priority consideration over these clubs, just because Diamondbacks brass contracted a shameless case of Camelback Ranch envy?

4. A paid for, alternative Phoenix venue is at the exclusive disposal of the Diamondbacks - namely Chase Field. The club insists it's an unacceptable spring facility, and it's true there arent the necessary practice fields, but potential fields are nearby at Papago Park and easily upgraded elsewhere, and the Dbacks host a pair of spring games every year at Chase.

If Hall's stadium quest was truly confined by organizational pride not to soak the public, couldnt such a 'creative' FO manage the above or similar arrangement? Sure, but they're confined instead by a minimum threshold of conscience. As they've aggressively lobbied the public that both gifted facilities (Chase and TEP) are now completely unsuitable to their "needs", it's easy to make a case the Diamondbacks are among the greediest, least grateful outfits in baseball.

Hardly news to this page, or here and there. Somebody's got to be the greediest MLB team this spring. It might as well be Arizona's duplicitous "home team", applauding itself for years as a singularly fan-centric, virtual non-profit. The point is that neither greed nor gaping inconsistencies - between what is and what the Diamondbacks so often want us to believe - are qualities to be proud of.

Break Up: The Dodgers

When most thirty year marriages end in court, the hilarity escapes me, but it's almost impossible to read up on the pending divorce of Dodger owners, Frank and Jamie McCourt, while maintaining a straight face. The AP account reports excess you'd expect from one of LA's most notable power couples:

Jamie McCourt's filing states she is seeking reinstatement as the team's CEO as well as access to perks including travel by private jet, stays at five-star resorts and use of the Dodgers owners' suite. She wants $321,000 a month in spousal support if reinstated to her former position. If not, she believes she should be paid nearly $488,000 per month.

Here's the LA lawyers, girding for battle:

There are estate records that list Frank McCourt as the team's sole owner, said Bert Fields, Jamie McCourt's attorney.However, the lawyer who drafted the documents alerted Jamie McCourt to the mistake last year in front of her husband who acknowledged the paperwork should have reflected the co-ownership of the Dodgers, Fields said.

"It was always supposed to 50-50," Fields said. "New documents were drafted, but they were never signed."

Frank McCourt's lawyer, Marshall Grossman, called the account a "fairy tale" and said the marital agreement lists the Dodgers and the adjoining property, including Dodger Stadium, as his client's separate assets and the couple's homes belonged to Jamie McCourt.

"This is the deal Mrs. McCourt wanted and got," Grossman said. "She now wants everything put back as community property. Even a chef knows you can't unscramble the eggs."

Wait, it gets better.

Frank McCourt:

...said he has allowed Jamie McCourt to identify herself as "co-owner" for the "interests of family harmony" but her claim has damaged the Dodger organization.

Wow. That's some family man. Once I offered my wife a club sandwich in the interests of family harmony, but never an actual club! This Frank is some sport.

Jamie McCourt

...claims her husband plotted to boot her from the team's front office as a way to "humiliate and ostracize" her. She said she was excluded from management decisions.

My impression is, if you're categorically "excluded from management decisions", you probably aint the CEO of much. Nevertheless, this is a formidable woman who sees herself as the engine behind Dodger success. From a 2007 issue of Jewish Woman:

Transforming the Dodgers into a family business is nothing new for McCourt. After 15 years with her own law practice, she spent a decade as vice president and general counsel of The McCourt Company, her husband’s real estate development firm. "We have completely different skill sets," she says of working successfully with her husband. "He’s the visionary and I’m the one who actualizes the vision."

This is what's hard to reconcile. If you're genuinely seen - within the organization - as an equal authority (ownership) figure and you've additionally established yourself as the hands on partner who 'actualizes the vision', how can you reasonably be "excluded from management decisions"? Practically speaking, how could that happen? It just doesnt sound to me like Jamie McCourt had much support or allegiance high up in the organization, and if that's true, she wasnt the CEO or co-anything, beyond ceremonial title.

Of potential interest to Dback fans, one of the McCourts' sons was installed as Dodgers' "Director of Marketing" a while back, although I couldnt pinpoint when. One would think this slot would've been right up Derrick Hall's alley, and I note Derrick left the Dodgers shortly after the McCourts arrived, as well as the fact the son has since left the post and returned to "business school". Interesting career path, to say the least, and one has to wonder if this nepotism hastened Hall's departure.

Jokers

As a rule, Diamondhacks avoids disparaging people's physical features. It's less a moral code than simply the daunting challenge of coming up with zingers sufficiently funny or cruel. We called Jeff Moorad fat once, which seems sporting since he's been fat for a long time. Plus, he can help being fat. If he occasionally refused butter and Baco-bits on all those ballroom potatoes, or walked his damn dog, there'd be no issue.

So, it's somewhat out of character that we run this. Anyway, my wife and I were watching a September game on TV , or trying to, when CEO Derrick Hall hijacked the telecast, reciting something about being "excited". As we understandably glazed over, my wife blurts out this bombshell:

That's the smallest mouth I've ever seen on a man.

Wow. She's right. All these years, pouncing on Derrick's illocution like a crazed raptor - and I never noticed. My obsession with what came out of his mouth blinded me from the real story. His mouth is incredibly small for a man. Or a marmoset, since we've broached the subject. This doesnt impede Mr Hall from yakking up the Dbacks, of course, but raises a question whether the Barnum pushing "All You Can Eat" has bitten off more than he can physically chew. A mini sirloin burger looks to be his match, or perhaps yogurt.

If you think that's 'going too far', contrast Hall's feeble kisser with AJ Hinch's outrageous wraparound. The ostensible skipper's frogyap extends well beyond where a healthy orifice ends, traveling half way 'round his smug Execu-Dome.



















And when he opens that giant clamshell, a poor ump could lose his double chin faster than a rhubarb.



If there's ever a Batman sequel, where they need a Joker, who instead of terrorizing an American city, systematically destroys baseball fans' hopes in another, they know where to find him.

Homestands Mercifully End

Congratulations to the Diamondbacks, who stole their second September series -in only eight tries - both over the powerful Padres. Stolen by a fan, who interfered with skywalking San Diego CF Tony Gwynn Jr, by reaching over the fence for a Chad Tracy pool shot. Stolen by HP umpire Tim Timmons in the eighth, who gifted Esmerling Vazquez two called strikes after the wild righty went 3-0 on leadoff speedster Luis Durango. Assuming Gwynn makes the grab (and it appears he might on the tape), fan and umpire cost San Diego a minimum of four runs in the game.

But as Mark Reynolds might say, "So what?" The meaningless victory was made moreso by the fact it was primarily driven by veterans expected to flee in the fall; Tracy and Ojeda, who compiled no less than half the teams hits, runs and rbi's between them. That said, Billy Buckner worked seven, and with a September ERA under four, has solidified his standing in next spring's wide open rotation.

Speaking of Augie, for some time, one lower deck fan in particular bellows "Augie, Augie, Augie...Oy, oy, oy" as the diminutive crowd favorite approaches the plate. He's so loud you can often hear him on telecasts. Anyway, today Sutton divulges this superfan is, get this, actually one of the team's owners. Not a General Partner, but this iron lunged galoot, Jim Weber, holds a significant financial stake in the team.

I suppose one could look at this a couple ways. It's cool having an owner passionate enough to come to games and scream and shout. On the other hand, when arguably the most vocal fan in your entire base is one of the owners, it's pretty goddam embarrassing.

Derrick Hall parked himself in the booth in the season's final home game. You already know what I think of these "guest appearances", so I'll relay my wife's take instead. She's a casual fan, with no axe to grind, who just likes to see the team win. She shook her head and concluded:

How pathetic. That guy has an excuse for everything.

What's funny is, Hall toned down his standard onslaught, presumably in response to the recent groundswell of unprecedented online criticism. But fan patience and perceptions have deteriorated sufficiently to outstrip his modest rhetorical concessions. Amid a local depression, he's still preaching affordability of season tickets to families, claiming the best 'stadium experience' in the land, etc. It's awkward and sad. If it werent for the 2011 All Star Game, I'd almost think Hall is ready to jump ship. He sounds that desperate. The deeply disappointing W/L record, which Hall first laid at the feet of Bob Melvin, then "injuries" after the AJ Hinch non-turnaround, was once again today blamed on "a really poor start", begging the question of how reasonable people are supposed to weigh this miserable season's middle and end.

Justin Upton reached three times today and let a slow grounder get under his mitt in right, that advanced two runners a total of four bases. Jesus Christ, Superstar!

Finally, kidcaster. I'm down with it, provided kids are respected and have a chance to announce the game. Unfortunately, it's devolved into awkward "interviews" of frightened kids patronized by middle-aged TV stars. Daron's passable, but Grace sounds as if he's never talked to a kid, off camera, in his life, and takes on a particularly creepy persona around girls between 8 and 35. Or as he might say, "females".

"I bet your brother picks on you?"

"Do you have a boyfriend?"

Much like the Diamondbacks first 155 games, I'm not enthusiastic about this segment.

Rebuilding Illusions

Q: Is every year a rebuilding year?

Derrick Hall: I would not categorize this as a rebuilding year... It is not a rebuild when you have a core of Justin Upton, Mark Reynolds, Stephen Drew, Brandon Allen, Miguel Montero, Chris Snyder, Chris Young, Gerardo Parra, Dan Haren, Conor Jackson, Max Scherzer, Ryan Roberts, Juan Gutierrez, Esmerling Vasquez, Dan Schlereth and Chad Qualls in place, to name a few....

To name a few? Heh. See what Hall's up to? In response to a generic rebuilding question, he's done two very clever things.

First, he's taken the traditional concept of "core" (ie typically young impact players an organization builds around) and devalued it to little more than an expanded laundry list of possible 2010 contributors. Since when is 29 year old journeyman Ryan Roberts a franchise cornerstone? In what successful 2009-10 core does Dan Schlereth (and his 8.76 ERA) comfortably reside? What vital contributions can we bank on from Brandon Allen, Chris Snyder, Conor Jackson, Chris Young and the host of young or injured relievers? Hall's elevated all these looming 2010 uncertainties to "core" status, presumably to drum up excitement and overstate his actual hand.

Second, he's not only tied this forward-looking potential to roster stability next year, but very specifically tries to pawn it off as evidence the organization didnt rebuild "this year" either. Rebuilding connotes two impressions that accurately capture Arizona's 2009 season, yet which Hall desperately wants to avoid; instability and losing.

Despite this mis-direction, and Jim McLennan's Oscar-worthy efforts (Best Supporting Role in A Comedy), there's no denying the 2009 Diamondbacks reconstituted a big chunk of their roster, both in contrast to 2008, as well as during the 2009 season. They endured a new skipper and pitching coach in May. Of nine Opening Day starters, only two (Drew, Young) regularly start today. (Ok, stalwarts Upton and Reynolds didnt start the opener, but Chris Young hasnt been the continuous embodiment of stability either.)

Four of Hall's alleged core guys werent even on the 2009 opening day roster, and the pitching staff has new names and unfamiliar roles aplenty: Scherzer, Buckner, Zavada, Vasquez, Boyer. In addition, Garland and Rauch, acquired within the past fourteen months, have departed in favor of even newer faces.

Here's a list of 2008 starters and impact contributors who had lesser or non-existent roles in 2009:

Brandon Webb
Randy Johnson
Micah Owings
Brandon Lyon
Tony Pena
Juan Cruz
Chris Snyder
Orlando Hudson
Conor Jackson

We havent mentioned Eric Byrnes or Chad Tracy. All eleven of these guys have, for one reason or another, been supplanted as part of a significant restructuring, with the likes of Parra, Montero, Roberts, Allen, Garland and Buckner. Most of the bullpen turned over.

I'm not saying there wont be improvements from within this new, second tier of Dbacks. There assuredly will. I'm saying our true core of irreplaceable prime timers is consideraby smaller, and that Hall touting a broadly defined group is something of a contradiction in terms. Sixteen players is essentially 2/3 of a major league roster, and ours may fail to win 70 games this season. If we had an enviable core that large, in any imminent sense, we most likely wouldnt be looking up at the San Diego Padres.

In this business, you're either competing or rebuilding, and to the extent Hall's denied the latter, he's "competing" somewhere other than on the field, embellishing a decidedly underwhelming present and preliminary 2010 structure. How can any organization prioritize the final two months of a disasterous season as "tryouts" for next year, while denying some manner of a rebuild?

Public relations, that's how.

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.

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.

More Than A Feeling

From time to time, you may have noticed I have a harsh word for the Diamondbacks. There were the usual dozen or so things wrong at last night's game, and we'll touch on one or two in the photo captions below, but despite the loss and lethargic offense, we actually had a good time - thanks to the most positive stadium development since the 2004 arrival of new management.



They opened the roof. Well, wait, that's not the new thing. That's just a good old standby. They said indoor temp was 76', which it wasnt, not unless their thermometer was rubbing a waffle cone. More like 81, but pleasant enough out of the sun.



Notice how much lighter the park is with an open lid. This was first pitch, and some more folks straggled in. Not a lot more. Anounced gate was 26.6. We estimated 22-24. Maybe they counted ST no-shows, or are just bullshitting again. Click on the expanded pic to really eyeball all the lower deck empties.



Here's what six dollars got me. An upper deck sightline through a lucite block, conveniently lodged to obscure home plate and first base. These are Hall's relentlessly promoted $5 seats, which actually go for $6 to $14. We paid six, lower than most. (The old owner charged a buck)



This picture doesnt convey how high we were above the Rockies' pen. I got me some first row acrophobia, so initiated a mental health "upgrade"....for medicinal purposes, you understand.



This is Darryl, the valley's most famous ballpark vendor, toting his specialty - Lemonade - Lahk GRANDma used to make. You KNOW you want it!



Ok, here's the good stuff. After a year of yakking about theoretical values that often amounted to a fruitless scavenger hunt, Derrick finally got the goddam signs up. They are visible, bold even, and absolutely everywhere - far exceeding my jaded expectations. The message around the concourse used to be "All our food's expensive. Get used to it". The new message is, "Hey look. We really want you to buy this cheap stuff. It's right here. And here. And here."

So, for the first time in a long time, we did. We bought two hot dogs, popcorn, and two comically small sodas - for $7.50. The value is a fraction of what the Padres offer in terms of size, quality and price, but I dont want to dwell on that now. I want to congratulate Derrick Hall and the Diamondbacks for starting to tangibly cater to cost-conscious fans instead of just talking about it.


I dont know how much they net off my $7.50 purchase - I cant imagine a whole lot. But that's hardly the bottom line. The important thing is these signs and feeding two people for eight bucks make me feel better. Not just about the food. About the ballpark. About my decision to come. About the Diamondbacks. About Derrick Hall. It makes me feel like they're on my side, or at least understand it more than they have the last four years.

For the first time in a long time, it makes me feel like coming to more of their games. These deeds - not talking points - encourage tangible reciprocation, and as any accountant (well, except for Tom Garfinkel) can confirm, amount to more than a feeling.

****************
Song of the Day - More Than a Feeling (Boston)

Unavailable

Less than 48 hrs from real ball and Monday's Chase extravaganza's looking closer to a sellout at dbacks.com. Today they say there are no bleacher seats available, less than three days after offering four stubs together in the tenth row, about two thirds of the way down.

Wow. Those bleacher seats sure filled up fast, huh? Maybe that happens when thousands (perhaps tens of thousands) of Infield Reserve seats in the same price point are mysteriously "unavailable" for 36 hours online. We detailed this curiosity three days ago.

And hey, guess what. Now that bleachers are "unavailable", you can get half a dozen seats togther in the twelfth row of the previously unavailable 18K seat, 40 row Infield Reserve! But wait, it gets better. For days now, poor saps saving up for a pair of the worst seats in the house (OF Reserve) have been offered just that -Row 40, Row 38. Yet just now, for giggles, I requested a dozen OF Reserve seats together - and got em in Row 25!

Let's review what's happening. For at least several weeks, the Diamondbacks have systematically rerouted online shoppers from requested sections that subsequently indicated what appears to be fairly widespread availability. We have documented this in the two largest upper deck pricepoints, Infield and Outfield Reserve, and are monitoring the currently "unavailable" bleacher area in anticipation of similar developments.

We can think of two explanations for this on-again, off-again status. Either this is a strategic ruse by the Diamondbacks, or secondary sellers (brokers, concierges, etc) are contractually dumping unsold seats back to the club. In either case, our initial concern this was an isolated computer anomaly no longer applies. The problem with the secondary seller argument is that the abruptly frozen sections are upper deck, hardly the currency of resort concierges, and it's typically midrow seats that suddenly 'become available' - not low row, higher markup locations normally favored by scalpers and brokers.

If this is a strategy, why would the Diamondbacks employ it? Artificially reducing seat supply (or the supply of any commodity) increases the equilibrium trigger price for a given level of demand. Surfers looking for Opener tickets typically dont opt out when the system implies uppers are gone - not when the system reroutes them to other comparably priced sections. It creates an illusion that tickets are harder to come by, and a false sense of urgency to scoop up what's available before it's too late. This tends to drive up the price people are willing to pay for a given location. ( Keep in mind, our front office has expressed interest in artifically (albeit publicly) reducing seat supply, flirting with construction of a wall circling midway around the upper deck.

The rerouted sections appear, for the most part, to be comparably priced, so this doesnt appear to be an obvious money grab. But what else do the rerouted areas have in common? For one thing, they're more visible on television. Despite being a much larger section, IF Reserve is more easily hidden from game action cameras. Bleacher and OF Reserve vacancies are often picked up by first and third base wells and shots from behind home plate. Most shots from centerfield, focused on pitcher and batter, are too tight to catch much of the upper deck in foul territory - especially if camera operators are instructed not to.

At the very least, whether this curious practice is a cynical strategy or a secondary dump, it's evident many of the Diamondbacks' most cost sensitive customers have been systematically offered and sold seats of lesser utility (to them) by ordering their tickets farther in advance. They are effectively penalized for planning and prioritizing their ticket purchases. While this may not violate any law, it would certainly seem to fall short of many fans expectations of disclosure and fairness when they go online to purchase event tickets.

If the Diamondbacks are denying available seat locations to unknowing customers, merely to create a false sense of dwindling supply, or to look better on TV, then they have breached a longstanding trust between buyer and seller, between fan and ballclub, and between ethical men. Virtual seats arent the only thing that can be made unavailable by the click of a mouse.

Fans can be "unavailable" too.