Rays attendance is not about fan apathy. It's a structural thing.

39 Comments

I think Bob nailed the Rays attendance hubbub pretty good last night, but I figured I’d add my thoughts.

No one is saying that it’s wonderful that the Rays drew poorly last night (or draw poorly in general), but I think the notion of blaming Rays fans for their apathy or failure to support the team is myopic.

Yes, there was a history of losing there that has been hard to overcome, but there are institutional problems that have always meant for poor attendance and always will make for poor attendance for the club.  The park sucks. It’s separated from the main population center of the Bay Area — Tampa — by a long and annoying bridge. The people that do live in St. Petersburg are not demographically ideal for baseball. Many of them are also likely transplants as well, and have loyalties to other teams.

We’ve heard all of this before, of course, so I’m a bit puzzled at the “why won’t Rays fans support their team!” comments this morning. Not so much from David Price and Evan Longoria — they’re emotional about it, I get that — but from a lot of fans on the web and on Twitter.

For example, one of my friends on the web noted that, like Florida, Philadelphia suffers from 12% unemployment right now, and they’ve sold out hundreds of games in a row.  Well, yeah. But that team has also played baseball in that town for a 127 years, the population of Philadelphia is seriously from Philly, and the park is both beautiful and accessible. It’s a gross understatement to say that those things matter, and it’s an unfair simplification of things to slam Rays fans for failing to support their team.

Buster Olney added a nice bit to this in his column this morning as well: marketing matters. He takes David Price and Evan Longoria’s comments about the attendance and pretends a bagel shop owner said the same thing. It’s understandably silly. Location matters. Marketing matters. Market matters.  In this, the Rays are fighting against the tide (and in some cases, have themselves to blame).

I think the Rays fans that do show up are great fans. But I get why many don’t show up.  It may lead to the team leaving someday. If so, hey, that’s business, and it has always been a possibility with this team. I don’t see it, however, as a reason to cast aspersions on an entire market.

Matt Harvey has a 13.19 ERA since coming back from the disabled list

Getty Images
1 Comment

Matt Harvey‘s season was mostly a loss due to extended time on the disabled list. He’s been given a chance, however, to end the season strong and make a case for himself in the Mets’ future plans. Unfortunately, he has been unable to make that case. He was shelled again last night, and his late season opportunity has been a disaster.

Last night Harvey gave up seven runs on 12 hits and struck out only two batters in four innings against a Marlins team that, until facing him anyway, had been reeling. It was his fourth start since going on the shelf in mid-June and in those four starts he’s allowed 21 runs, all earned, on 32 hits in 14.2 innings, for an ERA of 13.19. In that time he’s struck out only eight batters while walking seven. His average fastball velocity, while ticking up slightly in each of his past four starts, is still below 95. Back when he was an ace he was consistently above that. His command has been terrible.

Injury is clearly the culprit. He had Tommy John surgery just as he was reaching his maximum level of dominance in 2013. While he came back strong in 2015, he was used pretty heavily for a guy with a brand new ligament. Last year he was felled by thoracic outlet syndrome and this year a stress injury to his shoulder. Any one of those ailments have ended pitchers’ careers and even among those who bounce back from them, many are diminished. To go through all three and remain dominant is practically unheard of.

Yet this is where Matt Harvey is. He’s 28. He’s still arbitration eligible, for a team that is, to put it politely, sensitive to large financial outlays. While his 4-5 start opportunity to end the year may very well have been seen as a chance to shop Harvey to another team, his trade value is at an all-time low. It would not be shocking if, on the basis of his recent ineffectiveness, the Mets considered non-tendering him this offseason, making him a free agent.

Someone would probably take a chance on him because famous names who once showed tremendous promise are often given multiple chances in the big leagues (See, Willis, Dontrelle). But at the moment, there is nothing in Harvey’s game to suggest that he is capable of taking advantage of such a chance. All one can hope is that an offseason of rest and conditioning will allow Harvey to reclaim at least a portion of his old form.

Noah Syndergaard is concerned about climate change

Getty Images
9 Comments

Mets starter Noah Syndergaard has been on the disabled list for most of the season so it’s not like “sticking to baseball” is an option for him. The man has a lot of time on his hands. And, given that he’s from Texas, he is obviously paying attention to the flooding and destruction brought by Hurricane Harvey and its fellow storms in recent weeks.

Last night the self-described “Texan Republican” voiced concern over something a lot of Republicans don’t tend to talk about much openly: climate change and the Paris Agreement:

The existence of Karma and its alleged effects are above my pay grade, but the other part he’s talking about is the Trump Administration’s decision, announced at the beginning of June, to pull out of the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement on climate change mitigation. Withdrawal from it was something Trump campaigned on in 2016 on the basis that “The Paris accord will undermine the economy,” and “put us at a permanent disadvantage.” The effective date for withdrawal is 2020, which Syndergaard presumably knows, thus the reference to Karma.

Trump and Syndergaard are certainly entitled to their views on all of that. It’s worth noting that climate experts and notable think tanks like the Brookings Institution strongly disagree with Trump’s position with respect to tradeoffs and impacts, both economic and environmental. At the same time it’s difficult to find much strong sentiment in favor of pulling out of the Paris Agreement outside of conservative political outlets, who tend to find themselves in the distinct minority when it comes to climate change policy.

I’m not sure what a poll of baseball players would reveal about their collective views on the matter, but we now have at least one datapoint.