Pirates Q&A with Dejan Kovacevic
Share with others:
Click here to submit your question
Much, much feedback to my comments about the Monday attendance, as expected.
Equally expected, no matter how I was going to word that, everyone was going to take from it exactly what they wanted ...
Matt Wood of Washington, D.C. blamed a "series of long-running P.R. problems" in the Pirates' front office," going back to and including the Galbreath family not having been true Pittsburghers.
Paul Krzywicki of Mountain Top blamed the owners for "failing to invest in the team and placing the profits in their own pockets. Why would I spend my hard-earned money going to a ballgame in Pittsburgh? I rather spend it and my time in Altoona and not helping the owners purchase another newspaper or amusement park.
Matt Fiffik of Franklin Park blamed it on "weeknights in April, May and part of June, which are brutal for anyone with kids involved in sports. Two of mine play ball, take music lessons, dance, etc. If both parents work, it's really tough to get geared up to take the family to a weeknight ballgame."
Peter Selednik of Plum blamed the traffic, saying, "Transportation is a hassle. The parkways are all jammed, and it's expensive to park. People in this town don't want to deal with that on a weeknight."
Larry Zalewski of Mount Lebanon blamed it on the Pirates' "ridiculous policy about bringing in concessions from outside the park."
Ron Leighton of Annandale, Va., blamed it on the low season-ticket base, saying, "It seems like during the week at home only season-ticket holders attend as crowds are always in the 12,000 range."
Well, with all due respect to those views and many others, my answers to all of them on this count would be no, no, no, no," and an emphatic yes.
Ron correctly points out that it is the season-ticket base and no one else who came Monday. But this notion that people are protesting the Pirates or the owners or whatever, an argument so many love to make in discussions about attendance, simply does not wash.
On Saturday night, when Ronny Paulino bobblehead dolls were given away, a crowd of 34,775 -- including a huge walkup that seemed to take the team by surprise -- attended. Fans were streaming across the bridge from Downtown even through the second and third innings.
Not much of a protest there. The money that you give to the owners on a Saturday is just as green as the money you give them on a Monday.
On Monday night, when all that was being offered was a pitching matchup that had a chance to be memorable long after Paulino's head pops off its spring, no one but the season-ticket base came out.
And that is my question: Why?
To repeat, please spare me this concept that there is some singularly minded protest going on. If and when something like that does happen, it will not be a rumor or a theory. Everyone will know.
Same with the idea that the kids are too busy. Fact is, the kids are not too busy to go to hockey games. Take a look at the average age of the Penguins' crowds.
Same with the concessions. Did they let you carry popcorn into the theater when you went to see "Spider-Man 3" last weekend?
Same with the traffic. It costs you $3 to park Downtown, and inbound traffic to Pittsburgh on a weekday rush hour is about as breezy as you can get. Everybody is headed the other way.
Why is a pure and simple good pitching matchup not enough to draw a nice crowd? Why is it not enough to pick up the morning paper and see that two of the National League's best left-handers will go that night?
My view is this: Partly but not entirely due to the Pirates' many failures, baseball has become mostly irrelevant in Pittsburgh.
Go into one of our sports bars, and listen: Does anyone really talk about which teams are the ones most likely to win the World Series? Does anyone watch games not involving the Pirates?
Drive around our city, and ask yourself how many of our children have baseball as a first love. You will be hard-pressed to find a ballfield occupied by anything other than dust. By contrast, you will find kids shooting hoops, tossing footballs and, in a phenomenon fresh to the past couple generations, you will find kids filling up tennis courts to play street hockey to the extent that the City now feels the need to post signs at its courts warning against such use.
Why?
The Pirates should take blame for this, of course. The brunt of it. If they were not the worst franchise in professional sports over the past however long, it surely would have made an enormous difference.
But that was not my point: My point was about baseball in the broader sense. If your interest was in baseball, if you or your children grew up playing baseball, the game Monday might reasonably have been considered an attraction no matter what you thought of ownership or Tony Armas or anything else related to the Pirates.
Q: Dejan, I found your introductory remarks to yesterday's Q&A quite interesting. As I sat at Monday night's game, I was thinking the same things that you expressed.
Actually, I was not surprised at the turnout. I looked back in last year's media guide and saw that the Ian Snell-Roger Clemens "classic" game in September 2005 drew fewer than 14,000 fans. I share a full-season plan, attending about half the games. I had not picked Monday night's game in our March ticket distribution, so I exchanged another seat for my Monday night ticket. I will do the same on Sunday when Randy Johnson will be pitching.
As to your bigger question, there are the usual suspect answers you mention. No need to further discuss the ineptitude on and off the field. I know that you receive many passionate postings for the Q&A, but I have long felt that Pittsburgh baseball fans do not have a great deal of passion for the Buccos. Looking at the crowd at games, you are as likely to see somebody wearing a David Ortiz jersey as one with Jason Bay's name and number. At Steelers and Penguins games, the crowds are a sea of black and gold. I have also noticed that some non-sports bars have to be asked to turn on the Pirates' TV broadcast.
I think that years of selling the sizzle instead of the steak are coming home to roost for the Pirates. By promoting bobbleheads and fireworks as the reason to come to the ballpark, the Pirates have created a whole generation of casual fans who come to the park for the experience, food, giveaways. These fans aren't likely to notice or care that Dontrelle Willis is pitching, or that it is likely to be a great pitching matchup with Tom Gorzelanny going for the Pirates. As a 20-year-season ticket holder, I realize that I must put up with Pierogie Races, Skating Monkeys, etc., so that the Pirates can pay the bills. But I think they have gone overboard in making the game almost secondary.
Fred Orlansky of Squirrel Hill, Pittsburgh
KOVACEVIC: Of the 100-plus emails I got on this subject, Fred, yours is the only one that came from someone who actually attended the game.
The Pirates could consider themselves immensely fortunate if they had, oh, 10,000 more baseball fans like you.
But, to repeat, what I am discussing here is not a criticism of the fan base. It is not even close to that. Rather, it is posing a question as to how much the sport still means to the people of our region.
Q: Not only can a team struggling to stay above water ill afford to let the National League's statistically worst pitcher trot out to the mound even one more time, the reality is that, with Zach Duke and Paul Maholm looking like the second comings of Josh Fogg, the Pirates need to find out what they have in Bryan Bullington, John Van Benschoten, etc.
Is it crazy to think that they have as much a shot at being in the rotation next year as Duke and Maholm do?
Matt Fromm of Etters, Pa.
KOVACEVIC: Nothing is crazy when you look at the incredible opponents' batting averages against Duke and Maholm. No matter their individual successes, that number simply has to become manageable for either pitcher to be seen as anything more than an innings-eater at the major-league level.
There is this, too: The Pirates unquestionably can use more pitchers who miss opponents' bats. Now, neither Bullington nor Van Benschoten is going to profile that way, which is part of what made Brad Lincoln's elbow surgery such a painful blow. He really was the only guy in the system who looked to be a strikeout type.
And man, are those guys expensive through trades or free agency.
Q: Is Adam LaRoche finally on track? Or are we seeing just a random spurt? Personally, I think he has turned the corner. His swing, as well as his pitch selection, seemed to have dramatically improved recently.
I inquire on this topic only because I want to arrange my schedule so that I can accompany you to the top of Mount Washington to unroll the list on naysayers. Anytime, I'll be there.
Rob Utter of Shadyside, Pittsburgh
KOVACEVIC: Yeah, you know, I could use a little help carrying that thing all the way up McArdle Roadway.
I think your gut is correct, Rob: LaRoche looks much more comfortable at the plate, and this does have a much more real feel to it than anything else so far. I mentioned in the game story yesterday that his single and double to left field had the look of forecasting something bigger, but I would be lying if I said I thought it would come the next night.
Q: Dejan, word on the street has it that Ryan Doumit was not in the starting lineup last night because he was so tired out from getting on base so much. Any truth to that?
Keith Vogelsang, Latrobe
KOVACEVIC: The manager likes Xavier Nady. The GM likes Nady. And it clearly is going to take quite a bit for management's confidence in him to waver, even to the point that he and Doumit split time in right field.
Take the above three sentences, and insert the names of Ronny Paulino and Adam LaRoche, and you have the rest of the answer because those are Doumit's three positions.
Do not expect it to change anytime soon.
We are all getting to be broken records on the Doumit subject. His numbers make the case better than anything anyone could write.
Until tomorrow ...
First Published May 16, 2007 6:14 pm
