Going into year one at Target Field, the Twins raised their Ticket prices an average of 45%.
The Twins gave two reasons for doing this.
1 The Team would now be responsible for the cost of operating their new stadium.
2 The additional Funds were needed to fund a substantially larger payroll. 100+ m
Much of the anger and obsession with the dropping payroll comes from this issue.
Despite last year's declining attendance, the Twins still enjoyed the 6th highest earnings in Baseball. Much of this can be attributed to the Twins high ticket price structure.
The Twins had the option of continuing to be a small market Team with a brand new stadium. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and San Diego chose this route. These teams brought their small market prices with them to their new stadiums.
The Twins chose the other route. Jerry Bell proclaimed that the Twins were now a mid market franchise, the days of being a small market team were now over.
When it comes to the price of attending a Twins game, a portion of that statement is true.
It seems to me it is a trend, and the trend is being driven by the hitting side of the equation. Teams don't care if a player strikes out a lot, if he is swinging for the fences and taking more pitches.
I like this study a lot. It's pretty actionable if indeed it's as simple as having a team K/9 from one's pitchers.
So looking for high correlations.
This seems to fit: 9/10 seasons, Twins teams had 1,000 K's, and only one did they not get over 79.
What's the opposite? When happens when Twins teams are under 1,000 Ks? (?/43 seasons)
Then, as the previous poster said - is this a trend? So perhaps 1,000 K's in 1967 is more impressive (and better predictor of success) than 1,000 K's in 2012. Would need to get the weighted numbers. So is there a weighted number of the league average where the Win-Loss ratio just flips out. e.g. when 1.15 x the league average K/9 rate - teams won no less than 85 games at 90% correlation.
Then I'd love to see some outliers. Such and such team had 1,400 K's but still was only 81-81. Then the opposite case, so and so team only struck out 750 guys, but yet won 85 games. And see if there was another strong factor to winning.
Again, I think this is great - thanks - it's quite actionable. Versus trying to sort out BABIP pitchers or hitters (only 44% correlation year over year) - although a few like Clayton Kershaw have a confidence/standard error rate that is very consistent - so despite for the majority - it not being something to consistently count on year over year - there's always a few exceptions, like Kershaw's BABIP and thus ERA, etc.
Does the increase in league strikeouts correlate to an increase in home runs or power? I think of control guys like Radke who did give up homers but never seemed to be burned by the homer. How about the Twins fielding these past few years (Revere was fantastic but then there was Delmon, Plouffe, Valencia, Nishioka, etc). Lots to chew on sorry for the questions :-)
I'm wondering if baseball is undergoing a structural change like NFL has, from running games to passing games. If so, I hope the Twins are adjusting.
Interesting read. I think the low pitch counts result from PTC as much as any health preservation measure. If you PTC, you get through PAs quicker. In games where that goes poorly, you're pulled early (probably with a low pitch count). In games where that goes well, you've mowed down the lineup three times using 75 pitches. Its in that fourth trip through the order when batters will start to figure out pitchers though, especially contact pitchers, and it becomes worthwhile for the manager to put in a reliever.
Some of this can also be attributed to the Twins for some reason have not produced many strike out pitchers in last 20 years. The above named pitchers were were above average strikeout pitchers and I believe in those years were the years they produced most strike outs. Its something I have stated on forums before the Twins need to look at scouting and what they do in developing pitchers because we never seem to get that top of line power pitcher that dominates and strikes people out. The ones we have developed usually have started out in another organization and we have trade or rule 5 drafted them. I look at different organization like ST.Louis , Tampa Bay, and Atlanta have developed so many top line pitchers and I wonder what they are doing were not doing. It would seem to me I would be study these organization and see what there doing were not and doing changing our organization to get similar results. But so far in last 20 years it seems business goes on as usual because Twins had to again trade for top line prospects from other organizations. I don't if its scouting process, or business side where they don't want to spend money for these picks, or if philosophy of pitching to hit strike zone not try to be power pitcher to strike people out. I would think it would be great story for reporters that follow the Twins to write about if they would do there research and also report what other people in baseball think of way Twins draft and develop players.
Right on Mr. Willihammer, Congratulations!
.654 OPS and -0.5 career WAR player, Denny Hocking.
I think you have it Wilihammer, tell the folks.
Haha, oh man, I know it but I don't know if I should say. Its equal parts hilarious and depressing.
He was basically the Nick Punto before Nick Punto was the Nick Punto.
I thought maybe Billy Beane but nope.. Not Randy Bush either.. Al Newman?
Another hint or two - This utility player played every position for the Twins except pitcher and catcher. This players wife gave birth to fraternal twins, making him the first player in Twins franchise history to become the father of a set of twins.
He was not a lead-off hitter but he did hit lead off now and then. This native Californian called the Metrodome home for over 10 years.
I would've guessed Knoblauch, too. Lots of leadoff men on the guesses, which makes sense. Gladden?
If not, got any more hints? Was it a leadoff guy?
Not Knoblauch or AM
Funny you asked, because I was just re-reading some passages from Moneyball yesterday, and according to Michael Lewis...
Nope, not Hrbek or Hatcher.