DLD 10/12/2009: What a bunch of sloppy playoffs (in Bill and Ted Style)

by jeffro on Oct 12, 2009 9:53 AM PDT Comment 35 comments

Dudes... Strange things are afoot at Circle K.

Jon "Most Excellent One" Papelbon gave up two inherited runners in a most heinous display of closerhood. He topped it off by giving up 3 more in the next inning... bogus

Another personage of historical significance to have a bad day, Nick Punto say it ain't so?!?!?! Piranha's are excellent on the base paths, wtf?!?!?!

And, it is the playoffs for the umpires too. In most non triumphant fashion CB Bucknor, Phil Cuzzi and Jerry Meals continued the egregious trend set forth by Randy Marsh in game 163.

One guy who hasn't been such a medieval dickweed this time around.

Dumpy dump dump dump dump.

2 recs | Comment 35 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

correction

~~bogus~~ excellent

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Oct 12, 2009 11:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

Papelbon is a loudmouth and probably Chuck De Nomolos’ Great Great Great Grandfather.

Remembering Bill King

by jeffro on Oct 12, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

We need Genghis Bob Khan and So-Crates to fix the, like, umpiring mess.

And also, your mom is hot!

JJ Martin
The best way to catch a knuckleball is to wait until the ball stops rolling and then pick it up. ~Bob Uecker

by JJ Martin on Oct 12, 2009 11:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Remember when we asked her to the Prom?

Hey Al, just go away, baby.

by doctorK on Oct 12, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Shut up, Ted!

Maybe you can find one made by Go F**k Yourself San Jose... -Poppy

by Leopold Bloom on Oct 12, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I just have a minor Oedipal complex

Hey Al, just go away, baby.

by doctorK on Oct 12, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Final 2009 television numbers out, and hoo boy are they bad news for the A's

The A’s were the 28th most viewed of the 29 U.S.-based MLB teams, with each CSN California telecast being viewed in an average of 20,000 households (down from 42,000 in 2008 when the games were on CSN Bay Area). The Nationals were seen in only 14,000 households on average to bring up the rear.

It seems that a lot of TV viewers fled the A’s for the Giants. San Francisco’s average viewership on CSN Bay Area increased from 56,000 households in 2008 to 81,000 in 2009. So overall, daily average baseball viewership in the Bay Area saw a slight increase from 2008 to 2009 (98,000 combined to 101,000 combined). However, while in 2008 Giants viewers outnumbered A’s viewers by a 4:3 ratio, in 2009 that ratio went all the way to 4:1.

Source of 2009 television numbers

Note that the CSN folks imply that the A’s huge drop was not because of the move from CSN Bay Area to CSN California, but rather should be blamed on team suckage/fan loss of interest:

The A’s saw ratings drop 53 percent to a 0.82/20,000 homes during their first season on CSN California. In previous years, A’s games were on CSN Bay Area.

But CSN executives dismissed suggestions that the move hurt ratings, pointing to the NHL Sharks’ ratings through their first two games this year, which are more than double last year’s pace for the first two games (1.4/36,000 homes vs. 0.6/15,000 homes).

One other thought: these numbers again validate the notion that the Minnesota Twins are not quite as “small market” as a lot of people think. They are the 8th most watched team in the major leagues, trailing (in order) the Yankees, Red Sox, Phillies, Mets, Cubs, Tigers and Dodgers.

by Soaker on Oct 12, 2009 12:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

talk to the defacto blogfather about abandoning our team for the

“more exciting” Giants.

Maybe you can find one made by Go F**k Yourself San Jose... -Poppy

by Leopold Bloom on Oct 12, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

srsly.

They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick

by mikev on Oct 12, 2009 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Imagine how much worse it would have been

if we hadn’t signed Matt Holliday and Jason Giambi!

"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan

by iglew on Oct 13, 2009 12:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I might have accidentally helped.

I probably watched almost as many Giants as A’s games, and would often flip back and forth during schedule conflicts.

They were a fun team to watch. I don’t want to root for their laundry, but there are about twelve players I really like on that team.

Maybe the A’s will be on the ascendant next year and the Jints will regress. Then the numbers will flow the other way.

"Flea Markets aren't just for blind dates anymore!"- The Reverend Billy Lard

by Gaijin_Suketto on Oct 13, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hey -- I never missed an A's game for a Giants game

I just sometimes found the Giants games more exciting; certainly in May-July when the A’s were a veritable yawnfest.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 13, 2009 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, traded for Holliday.

But I’d have rather seen Barton for another full season instead of Giambi, and I’d have been perfectly content with Buck/Cargo/Sweeney in the outfield, or Cargo/Davis/Sweeney or whatever.

Not that I don’t mind having Wallace now, but still. In hindsight you can always point out what was a bad move.

They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick

by mikev on Oct 13, 2009 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow, pretty incredible numbers.

I mean, it shouldn’t be surprising for a lot of reasons, but still much bigger shift to the Giants than I expected.

by DDroney on Oct 12, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ratings

from 05-08 giants had bad teams how were their ratings compared to A’s over that time. Especially in 06 when A’s were playoff bound? and from 07-08 when both were equally as bad teams?

by Asfan4ever723 on Oct 12, 2009 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I only have the households data back to 2007

2007…..2008……2009
Giants……66,000…56,000…81,000
A’s………..42,000…42,000…20,000

Through most of this decade the Giants had two substantial advantages over the A’s: 1) They had an extensive schedule of games on high-profile Fox affiliate KTVU-2, while the A’s over-the-air games were on independent KICU-36, and 2) through 2007 even crappy Giants teams could rely on the presence of Barry Bonds to attract the casual viewer. From 2000-2004 both teams were in the race every year so those two factors probably made the difference. If the A’s have outdrawn the Giants on television it would have been in 2005 (when Bonds played in only 14 games) or 2006 (A’s win division, Giants suck), but I have not seen those numbers.

by Soaker on Oct 12, 2009 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

cable deal

i bet that is a bigger factor. I know i couldn’t watch games this year

by Future Ed on Oct 12, 2009 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yep

the new ballpark blog has a good summary up about this today.

Remembering Bill King

by jeffro on Oct 13, 2009 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

wow, a's almost getting lapped by a sport that not only sucks on tv, but has a tv deal with "versus".

A's v Giants "is kind of like the difference between going to see the Ramones and going to see the Bee Gees. A's fans will go see the Ramones."
-BB 07/27/05

by xbhaskarx on Oct 12, 2009 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the move had a big impact on it

because it required everyone who wanted to see the A’s to have to order and set up those damn boxes, while those who didnt bother and wanted to watch baseball could still watch the gnats.

Don't believe in yourself.
Believe in Me who believes in You.

by Zonis on Oct 12, 2009 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How do they even come up with those numbers?

Can the tell how many people are watching by the cable boxes or is this like the nielson ratings where it is a household survey of some sort (if that is even on nielson does it)?

What about people who flip on the channel for 5 mins and then stop watching, do they count?

You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}

by micdog2001 on Oct 13, 2009 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm gonna guess that those kind of people can't count.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 13, 2009 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The quoted article doesn't specify, but

those are clearly Nielsen ratings they are quoting. Nielsen ratings are based on a very small sample. The sample is not random; it is very deliberately selected based on demographic data according to methodology determined by the company (Nielsen Media Research). That means that on the one hand it is less vulnerable to critiques of small sample size, but on the other hand it is more vulnerable to critiques of biased or faulty methodology.

If you ask me, to quote a Nielsen rating as saying that X thousand households were tuned to such-and-such show, as if that were demonstrated fact, is an irresponsible misrepresentation of what the numbers really show, in spite of the fact that news articles do that sort of thing all the time. But then I have a similar opinion quoting WAR numbers as if the guy really did create that many wins, so believe what you will.

Wikipedia has a lengthy discussion of how Nielsen ratings are determined.

"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan

by iglew on Oct 14, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

thanks iglew

I have never know of anybody who was part of the “very deliberately selected”.

There are only 25,000 total American households that participate in the Nielsen daily metered system. The resident population of the United States as of 2009 is about 307 million people.

You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}

by micdog2001 on Oct 15, 2009 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not surprised by those numbers

I think we will have a much better year next year but will not really be competitive until 2011 when the hitting prospects mature a little and our young pitchers get another year under their belts. The second half of this year was much more watchable but the overall product the last couple of years has not been.

I guess 2010 also depends on what Beane does in the off season.

We need that new ballpark and soon.

by Trainman on Oct 12, 2009 1:46 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think I saw more games this year than ever before

Due to not having a job and being able to be at home for daytime starts.

Yay contracting!

by bobnothing on Oct 12, 2009 2:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

So all those empty seats at the coliseum weren't

because people were staying home to watch these game on TV then. If the A’s start winning again (pretty please I need one of my teams to be good) then these numbers will improve obviously but the A’s need some players people can get to know and root for.

I still believe you have to spend money to make money and the A’s have in the past had a large and passionate fanbase and it could happen again if the A’s play this the right way.

by sirbed on Oct 12, 2009 3:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Sadly, winning won't do it

…as was proven in the early 2000’s.
The Bay Area had a winning team year after year in Oakland and attendance still sucked…and I’m sure ratings did as well.

I don’t get it. Maybe I am just a crazy baseball, and specifically A’s, fan. I live in SoCal and saw every A’s game in Anaheim, caught them in L.A., and in San Diego…and make the roadie up to Oakland. Pretty much every other game on E.I….and this was for a losing team.

I have trouble comprehending the lack of A’s fandom in NorCal.

by easyraider on Oct 12, 2009 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

*It's all Lew Wolff's fault and attendance has been good until this year dammit.

*snark

Remembering Bill King

by jeffro on Oct 13, 2009 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by iglew on Oct 14, 2009 9:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or he could get hitters out in the playoffs

That would be a good use of skill.

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Oct 15, 2009 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs