Its the highest percentage, because it seats a little more than a AAA team. They are 6th in Average Home attendance.

Keep an eye on that Road Attendance... I knew you or DKM would speak about how great that was.

They have played @Detroit and @Toronto. Check back after this series in Chi-Town and then off to KC... and then TB.

bull****, the sox are in the top 5 in road attendance year in and year out and i don't even need to check to confirm

and percentage of seats filled is a much better indicator than just total attendance because obviously every park seats a different amount of people. if fenway sat 50,000 people, then 50,000 would show up

quote:

---

Its the highest percentage, because it seats a little more than a AAA team. They are 6th in Average Home attendance.

Keep an eye on that Road Attendance... I knew you or DKM would speak about how great that was.

They have played @Detroit and @Toronto. Check back after this series in Chi-Town and then off to KC... and then TB.

---

Please just quit while you are already behind on this argument. WAY BEHIND!!!!

Calling the Sox a regional team is more than just stupid. The Brewers are an example of a regional team.

When you find yourself in a hole, STOP DIGGING!!!!

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/33/baseball-valuations-11_Boston-Red-Sox_330700.html

And, I'll just leave this here for DA 94 to read at his leisure.

Summary: it destroys any semblance of any argument that may be based on logic and facts as to whether the Sox are a regional team.

Conveniently, it also explains why the Sox/Yanks game was on both feeds too.

You can ***** all you want about it, but those numbers are the beginning and the end of any argument in the eyes of the MLB and the media.

Well...

2012 - as of today, Boston is now 9th.

2011 - Attendance was 9th - Finished 5th place in ALEast
2010 - Attendance was 4th - Finished 3rd place in ALEast
2009 - Attendance was 3rd - Finished 3rd place in ALEast - Lost LDS
2008 - Attendance was 1st - Finished 2nd place in ALEast - Lost ALCS
2007 - Attendance was 1st - Finished 1st place in ALEast - Won WS
2006 - Attendance was 2nd - Finished 3rd place in ALEast
2005 - Attendance was 1st - Finished 2nd place in ALEast - Lost LDS
2004 - Attendance was 4th - Finished 2nd place in ALEast - Won WS
2003 - Attendance was 4th - Finished 2nd place in ALEast - Lost ALCS
2002 - Attendance was 5th - Finished 2nd place in ALEast
2001 - Attendance was 5th - Finished 2nd place in ALEast

That tells me all I need to know. Fans like to see a winner. When a MLB team is winning, visiting fans come to see them. Road attendance improves with winning. It drops with losing. Which is why I said they have returned to a Regional team.

quote:

---

and percentage of seats filled is a much better indicator than just total attendance because obviously every park seats a different amount of people. if fenway sat 50,000 people, then 50,000 would show up

---

Percentage isn't necessarily a good predictor. If you close all the seats that don't get sold, you instantly improve your percentage. You have no way of predicting Boston is any different. The Dallas Stars were on a 3 year wait list for Seasont Tickets. A couple crappy seasons, and suddenly they are begging people to buy season tickets, reducing their price. In some cities... you can instantly reach capacity by either lowering prices or giving them away.

Some perspective on your claim...

2001 - Attendance: 32,412. Since then, attendance was always higher.
2000 - Attendance: 31,925. Prior, attendance was NEVER higher.

And just to be clear... in 1912 capacity was 35,000. Which means prior to 2001, the park never averaged at capacity. Until Boston started to win, and having won 2 WS in the past 10 years... they were a Regional team, and drew fans like what you'd consider any other team. Unless they return to WS level... they will continue to lose fans. No one wants to watch a stinker. Not on TV, not on the road... not at home.

Chowdah

That thing is full of misinformation...

quote:

---

Coach Terry Francona

---

quote:

---

The skinny

Do not expect a repeat of the Red Sox missing the postseason in 2011.

---

I don't dispute where the Sox were. They had a great run... People love a winner... I get that.

Now... the Sox have missed the last 2 playoffs... they will likely miss this year...and as quickly as they rose... they will have returned. Like I said... great run...

I hope after the Rangers' run, they have at least 2 WS to show for it.

Ok, this is going no where.

You either:
1) suck at math
2) suck at logic
3) both

If percentage isn't a good measure, then neither is the raw numbers as you can just lower your prices to that of a AAA team and sell more of them. More seats sold does not directly equal more fan support.

On that Forbes thing (which was from 2011 so it isn't as though things have changed THAT much) look at the gate receipts. The Sox are second to the Yankees. They are over 100 MILLION higher than the Rangers... Yeah so that puny park still pulls in 100 MILLION more dollars than the Rangers does. Does that mean anything?

To take it one step further, the Sox could continue its sell out streak and still be the LAST in the league in attendance. Why? Because their total attendance is capped. It isn't as though the Sox are losing attendance! But again, that is math and logic so...

Settle down Francis...

I didn't say it wasn't a good indicator... I said it wasn't necessarily a good indicator.

The fact you have a small park means you don't have 15,000 cheat seats, which drives up the average cost... and it forces anyone wanting into the park, to compete.

Supply & Demand. When they win... demand goes up, and supply remains the same, driving the prices up. That was the example I gave where the Dallas Stars had a 3 year wait. They kept increasing the prices, as the list grew, because anyone not renewing, they knew people were waiting.

Once they started sucking... the prices dropped, and open seats remained.

Give the Sox another year.

My comment about the Forbes link was tongue-in-cheek, to solicit a rant. Thus the winkie.

The tell-tale... will be when they can't fill the AAA stadium and have to drop prices

quote:

---

And just to be clear... in 1912 capacity was 35,000.

---

And then the Sox built the Green monster taking out all of the left field bleacher section... So using 1912's capacity as the measuring stick is incorrect. They've been at capacity for several seasons in a row now (last unsold out game was in 2002 I believe). So yeah, other teams may sell more tickets. They SHOULD sell more tickets if they have 10,000 more seats available.

That doesn't mean that the Sox are any less popular. Flawed math and flawed logic....

And the quote is "lighten up, Francis".

quote:

---

2011 - Attendance was 9th - Finished 5th place in ALEast

---

they finished 3rd last year, not 5th


NESN and the new ownership have built up a revenue stream that is second only to the mfy and their YES network. That money isn't going anywhere but up. That means the Sox will always be competitive and will never go through a prolonged string of losing season again (sure they missed the last 2 postseasons but the won 89 and 90 games respectively)

and the Sox have had less losing seasons in 100+ years of baseball than the rangers have had in what 40, they are gonna be just fine and couldn't be any further from the "regional" distinction

quote:

---

Official Fenway Park capacity:

1912-1946: 35,000
1947-1948: 35,500
1949-1952: 35,200
1953-1957: 34,824
1958-1959: 34,819
1960: 33,368
1961-1964: 33,357
1965-1967: 33,524
1968-1970: 33,375
1971-1975: 33,379
1976: 33,437
1977-1978: 33,513 1979-1980: 33,538
1981-1982: 33,536
1983-1984: 33,465
1985-1988: 33,583
1989-1990: 34,182
1991: 34,171
1992: 33,925
1993-2000: 34,218
2001-2002: 33,577 (day), 33,993 (night)
2003: 34,482 (day), 34,898 (night)
2004-2005: 34,679 (day), 35,095 (night)
2006: 35,692 (day), 36,108 (night)

---

http://www.bostonspastime.com/fenwayattendance.html

quote:

---

Clearly the Angels used some level of comparison and baseline, in offering him a contract. As does every team.

To say you have no way of measuring how a NL Home Run leader... MVP... the God of All baseball, time immemorial... would fare in the AL, is to say you have no ability to view talent.

The HR God of the NL goes to the AL... the guy who never hit less than 32HRs in a season, averaging 42 the past 3 seasons... to say you have no way of gauging if he can hit a HR in the AL is stupid.

---

Yes the Angels use scouting to determine how well he is going to play. Calling his experience in the NL equal to what to expect in the AL clearly isn't expected. COULD it happen? Sure. But how many times has a player gone from the NL to the AL and seen their individual numbers improve by doing it? How many times has the opposite happened (go from the NL to the AL and seen their numbers decline)? Conversely, how many times has a player gone from the AL to the NL and seen their individual production value increase? A hell of a lot more!

quote:

---

Regarding the Sox attendance... would you admit, if in 2 years, if they miss the next 2 playoffs, and if the "sell-outs" end... AND in both of these seasons (2012/2013) they finish outside the Top 10 in Road Attendance (they have dropped from 6th, to 9th to 12th i 3 Games with CWS)...

Would then you believe they are a regional team?

---

That is NOT what you stated. You stated that they are little more than a regional team now! Either you were trolling for a response or you believe they are.

The Sox are the second richest franchise in baseball. They have more in gate receipts than any other team except the Yankees. Using the attendance numbers doesn't have any control to it because the playing fields aren't equal. The total gate receipt is the only real one because 1 dollar in Boston is equal to 1 dollar in KC. Even though 15000 more people can go to each home game in Arlington, they still generated 100 million less in revenue. That tells me that those seats are either unoccupied or MUCH cheaper. That is comparing apples to apples. Also, why do the Rangers charge more when the Sox are in town than they do against some teams in their own division. That doesn't make ANY sense if the Sox are a regional team only....

Using the road numbers doesn't take into consideration the reality either. The 3 game series in Chicago, the average temp was 43 degrees. The highest temp was 47 and that was on a Sunday afternoon game! When the Sox played a day game in Arlington last year in August there were like 8,000 people there. It was 105 degrees.


[This message has been edited by Say Chowdah (edited 4/29/2012 6:04p).]

Chowd

quote:

---

Calling his experience in the NL equal to what to expect in the AL clearly isn't expected. COULD it happen? Sure. But how many times has a player gone from the NL to the AL and seen their individual numbers improve by doing it? How many times has the opposite happened (go from the NL to the AL and seen their numbers decline)? Conversely, how many times has a player gone from the AL to the NL and seen their individual production value increase? A hell of a lot more!

---

GREAT question, in fact that was where I was going to go with YOU...

I would say in general...

A player going from the AL Hitter to the NL will likely see their numbers DECREASE.
A player going from the NL Hitter to the AL will likely see their numbers INCREASE.

I thought that was universally accepted... as was the OP of the statement.

quote:

---

That is NOT what you stated. You stated that they are little more than a regional team now! Either you were trolling for a response or you believe they are.

---

You are correct... What I said was... they have returned. I was looking for common ground.

Just as I stated... it took the local fans time to lose interest. Fans are fickle... even Ags. Without an emotional attachment, fans (bandwagon fans like DKM) are even more fickle. Nobody in the NL, and most of the fans in other MLB cities... have lost interest. That is the point of Road Attendance. You won't go to RBiA this season with bunches of Sox fans. You don't see people wearing Sox hats, anymore.

Whether or not their home attendance diminishes, is not a reflection of the ROW, but should show you just how fickle fans are.


I haven't disputed their value, their receipts...

quote:

---

The Sox are the second richest franchise in baseball. They have more in gate receipts than any other team except the Yankees.

---

You missed my point with this statement:

quote:

---

Using the attendance numbers doesn't have any control to it because the playing fields aren't equal.

---

With a low capacity, it is very difficult to see what the ceiling is. You have no way to determine if 40k, 50k, 60k, 100k people would attend. The number is capped. HOWEVER, once they no longer sell out, you know you are definitely below the ceiling. Within the next 2 years, even the fans that are considered so loyal... the Sox fans... will be leaving empty seats.


The teams play where the teams play...

quote:

---

Using the road numbers doesn't take into consideration the reality either. The 3 game series in Chicago, the average temp was 43 degrees. The highest temp was 47 and that was on a Sunday afternoon game! When the Sox played a day game in Arlington last year in August there were like 8,000 people there. It was 105 degrees.

---

You are starting to sound like DKM with the weather... Let's look at the numbers at the end of the season...

quote:

---

I would say in general...

A player going from the AL Hitter to the NL will likely see their numbers DECREASE.
A player going from the NL Hitter to the AL will likely see their numbers INCREASE.

---

Please clarify this. What are you saying?

I contend:

A player (either position or pitcher) will see an increase in their individual production going from the AL to the NL.

Hitter A goes from the AL to the NL: He is used to tougher AL pitching. In the NL he will face easier pitching staffs. His numbers will increase.

Hitter B goes from the NL to the AL: He is now facing tougher pitchers. His numbers will decline.

Pitcher A goes from the AL to the NL: He's been facing the AL lineups. His individual numbers will improve.

Pitcher B goes from the NL to the AL: He's prepared to get ROCKED!

It is rare to see a player improve their performance going from the NL to the AL (curious about Fielder being in Detroit). And there are outliers (AGon). It's is much more common to see a player go from the AL to the NL and become a Rockstar.

quote:

---

Let's look at the numbers at the end of the season...

---

You used a sample size of 3 games to show that the Sox have lost road interest. I figured the weather is relevant in this case. And I don't worry what DKM says. But, if he's right about something, he is right.

Jeez...

You complain about me?!

quote:

---

You used a sample size of 3 games to show that the Sox have lost road interest. I figured the weather is relevant in this case. And I don't worry what DKM says. But, if he's right about something, he is right.

---

NO...Boston has had 12 Away Games. I used the cumulative Attendance for the Season. And I said...

HTH.

quote:

---

I contend:

A player (either position or pitcher) will see an increase in their individual production going from the AL to the NL.

Hitter A goes from the AL to the NL: He is used to tougher AL pitching. In the NL he will face easier pitching staffs. His numbers will increase.

Hitter B goes from the NL to the AL: He is now facing tougher pitchers. His numbers will decline.

Pitcher A goes from the AL to the NL: He's been facing the AL lineups. His individual numbers will improve.

Pitcher B goes from the NL to the AL: He's prepared to get ROCKED!

It is rare to see a player improve their performance going from the NL to the AL (curious about Fielder being in Detroit). And there are outliers (AGon). It's is much more common to see a player go from the AL to the NL and become a Rockstar.

---

The difference is the DH. Not the lineup from top to bottom. There isn't any good way to compare. I don't know enough hitters that have played in both leagues enough to dig into the numbers... Throw some names out there... When you have a .100 hitter batting 9th... you get a sure out. You have no protection for your #8 hitter, and your #1 hitter is coming to the plate with nobody on.

Where as if you have a .250 hitter as your DH and/or 9th hitter... the pitcher has to throw to the #8, and the #1 could actually have a RBI opportunity.

Batters who switched leagues:

Matt Holiday: NL to AL (HUGE drop off), back to NL (back to being an annual All Star)
Edgar Renteria: NL to AL (SUCKED HARD), back to NL (Decent again)
Manny: AL to NL (could have been a triple crown winner in LA)
AGon: NL to AL (All Star and still and ALL Star)
Prince Fielder: NL to AL (we'll see)
JD Drew: NL to AL (Good player in the NL, basically useless in the AL)
Andruw Jones: Mulitple All Star in the NL, servicable in the AL (Although age and weight have something to do with this I am certain)

I'm sure there are other examples out there but these are the ones that stick out in my head.

And I forgot the most obvious: big Mac!

Pat Burrell. Heart of the order slugger for the Phillies, to abject failure as the Rays' DH, back to important cog for WS winning Giants.

Lets have some parameters... 1 year in 1 league and career in the other proves nothing. Oakland is not a good reference team. Nor is TB for that matter. 2-3 injured years in 1 league can't be compared to a career in the other.

Admitted PED users are probably not a good Use Case.

I think I'd suggest to tap the brakes on Pat Burrell.

2009 - .221 / 14HR in 122 Games with TB
2010 - .202 / 2 HR in 24 Games with TB
2010 - .266 /18HR in 96Games with SF

First, TB is a crappy place to play. Second, you can't take 146 Games as an indicator. Third, he is a .253 hitter. I don't know that I'd consider him the heart of anything.

Matt Holliday - 1) Oakland? Really? 2) 1 YEAR? Really?

Edgar Renteria: .274 AL:9HR/Season (2Seasons) / .288 NL: 8.7HR/Season (14Seasons)

Manny - I dismiss everything with him, and won't even look because we know he tested positive at least once, while in the NL. Of ALL parks... LAD?! Yeah...

AGone: AL - .310: HR/3.55 PA / NL . 288: HR/4.7AB <- WOOPS

JDDrew: AL- .264: HR/3.36 PA/ NL- .286: HR/4.29 PA <- Wash.

Andruw Jones: So, you think age had something? Maybe injury, too?!
Yeah... his
Age/Gms/BAs/HRs:
30/154G/.222/26HR<-NL
31/ 75G/.148/ 3HR<-NL
32/ 82G/.214/17HR<-AL
33/107G/.230/19HR<-AL
34/ 77G/.247/13HR<-AL
35/ 10G/.200/ 3HR<-AL

You could argue he went from 31 sucking in the NL, to an All-Star in the AL at 32, 33 and 34. He is a poor example.

Big Mac?! .260 AL / .270 NL. Hardly a measurable difference, especially if you consider Oakland (again). Almost ANY player leaving Oak will improve their numbers, whether they stay in AL or go to NL. With that... He is an Admitted PED user. I have no idea base his stats on. Nobody (other than Sosa) in the NL has ever hit 70 and 65 HRs. Especially at 34 adn 35.

Big Mac used in Oakland and in STL. Therefore even playing field.

If you want to believe Manny only juiced in LA then that is your pejorative. Otherwise, keep fishing for stats that don't correlate to anything and somehow tie them together for your own argument purposes.

Ok... if you want to dismiss the points you can't rebute, and miss the point. Fine.

At what age did Big Mac begin using? '92 would be a likely season, but we have no way of knowing barring an admission.

Are you saying hitting in Oak is the same as any other place? Maybe we should compare the glut of pitchers that left there?!

When did Manny use?

quote:

---

I think I'd suggest to tap the brakes on Pat Burrell.

2009 - .221 / 14HR in 122 Games with TB
2010 - .202 / 2 HR in 24 Games with TB
2010 - .266 /18HR in 96Games with SF

First, TB is a crappy place to play. Second, you can't take 146 Games as an indicator. Third, he is a .253 hitter. I don't know that I'd consider him the heart of anything.

---

With all the statistics that you're usually pulling from your nether regions, your first argument is "TB is a crappy place to play..."

What you'd consider him is basically irrelevant. Larry Bowa and Charlie Manuel considered him a "heart of the order" guy, penciling Burrell in, almost exclusively, at 4-5 in the batting order.

The Rays attempted this as well, signing him to be a middle of the order run producer. This proved to be a disappointing acquisition for all involved.

His average year in Philly was 145 games, 92 RBI, 28 HR, .257 BA

His 146 games in Tampa: 77 RBI, 16 HR, .218 BA

Apparently, 146 games was an adequate sample size for the Rays front office to decide that enough was enough.

Maybe all things are not equal. Maybe change in league had little to do with it. But the fact is, he suffered a substantial drop off when he went to Tampa, and had a mild recovery when he went to the Giants (back to the NL).

Haha!

The kIng of the laughing/crying icon deflection technique gets pissed when the same is used against him!

Awesome!!!!!

Bump for Say Chowdah.

Enjoy.