Savannah “Wants a Winner” or a Loser…
The opening line of Adam Van Brimmer’s column Tuesday in the Savannah Morning news was, “The Sand Gnats’ new ownership wants a winner.” I’d also like a million dollars, a Mets World Championship, and world peace.
The Gnats contract with the Mets expired with the end of the 2008 season. The Gnats finished 61-76 in 2008 and were 102-170 in two years as a Mets affiliate after going 41-94 in 2007. There are a lot of expiring a-ball contracts in the SAL and MWL so it is hard to predict whether or not the Mets will return to Savannah.
Savannah is a good fit for the Mets. First, it is convenient for the players who can drive from St. Lucie to start the year or back down to Florida if they earn a promotion. Second, the ballpark has a new playing surface and video board and the club has made improvements to the clubhouse which now has a weight room with more improvements on the way. Third, the team is producing a better environment with better crowds.
Now back to Van Brimmer, who continues:
“Futility on the field, meanwhile, leads to futility in the stands. The Gnats hit .250 as a team this season with a league-low 62 home runs. They scored two or fewer runs in 37 of their 76 losses - and three or fewer runs in 11 of their 61 victories.
Nobody makes a point to support a low-scoring loser like the Sand Gnats. Most of the 1,600 fans who came out on average this season were at Grayson for the experience, not the baseball. Promotions such as cheap beer and amenities like kiddie play areas can only attract so many more fans.”
Ok, read the second sentence of that second paragraph again. “Most of the 1,600 fans who came out on average this season were at Grayson for the experience, not the baseball.” That statement is both true, and ruins the rest of this argument. The vast majority of fans go to minor league baseball games because they are wonderful affordable, family friendly entertainment. Few can name more than a handful of players.
The product on the field must match the goods off it to truly impact attendance.
Fine, show me the statistical evidence tying attendance to winning at the minor league level. You can’t, because it doesn’t exist. Minor league attendance is driven by the effectiveness of the minor league team’s front office and the club’s market size. How much fun do fans have at a game? Will they tell their friends and bring their company on a group outing? Are the kids entertained? Is the food at the concessions a solid value? Are there effective salespeople selling group and season tickets? None of this has to do with a winning team on the field.
A few years ago in fact, I did this exact study. I had 60+ years of attendance and win totals for the Stockton Ports franchise going all the way back to 1941. The correlation between team wins in a given year and team wins in year -1 to attendance in year zero was negligible. First half wins correlated slightly better with that year’s attendance, but really, not particularly well at all.
How about this year’s South Atlantic League? The top three teams in attendance were the Lakewood Blue Claws (6,346), Greensboro Grasshoppers (6,297) and the Lexington Legends (5,450). Just one of these teams was over .500 - Lakewood was 80-60. Greensboro was 66-72 and Lexington was a league-worst 45-93.
The bottom three teams in attendance were the Kannapolis Intimidators (1,899), Savannah Sand Gnats (1,624) and the Columbus Catfish (1,022). Kannapolis (67-68) and Columbus (67-69) were within two games of .500.
Print This Post