The media got a tour of Mays Field yesterday and noticed the Giants had taken down all the Bonds-related paraphenalia. No “Bonds Squad.” No “Road to History.” No “756.” No home-run counter. No surprises here. Remember my suggestion last month that the Giants stop pussyfooting and come out with this marketing campaign:
As Scott Ostler points out this morning, the kiss-off cuts both ways. Bonds didn’t help himself by opting out of the All-Star festivities or taking a pass on the last month of the season. Call it a mutual cynicism society: the Giants exploited every last ounce of Barry’s star power, and Barry cared just enough to fulfill the terms of his contract. Last year feels like a bad one-night stand during which there was much grunting and thrashing then come the morning, both parties had a look at each other and quickly called for taxis.
And now we have this morning-after mouthwash (“All Non-Bonds, All Season”), a lot of handwaving to distract the less-than-die-hard fans from what could be an historically bad Giants team. Step back from it all and it gives new life to the dulled mantra, “It’s a business.” Oh brother, is it ever.
Which leads to this question: Why bother? Why keep paying for the cynicism, the tin-ear marketing, the questionable management decisions? Yes, I re-upped my season tickets. Of course I did. If the San Jose Giants were 20 minutes away, I might redirect some of my baseball dollars in that direction, but alas, the ‘Hose is a bit far to satisfy my jones. Besides, I’m spoiled; I don’t want A-ball follies, I want the best, even if my home team is the worst of the best for a few years.
Also a confession: as much as I cringe at the Giants’ marketing lameness, I want it to succeed. I want 40,000 people in the park with me. I don’t pine for the days of 8,000 die-hards shivering in a semi-circle while the rest of the stadium sits echoing and empty. It would be nice if the team could attract 40,000 people a game who turned off their cell phones, refused to do the Wave, and understood the balk rule, but that’s a fantasy — especially in this market with its geographic transplants, hipsters, expense accounters, and various cultural distractions. So if the marketeers think “Gamers” is the way to go, so be it. Doesn’t mean I can’t make incessant fun of it, of course.
If I were a shareholder of SF Giants Corp. — and in a way, I am — would I be calling for immediate and extreme management turnover? A commenter recently said I should be front and center in a campaign for Paul DePodesta.
If Magowan decides tomorrow to replaces Sabes with DePo, I certainly won’t complain. But I wonder how much of the post-Jeff Kent Strategy — i.e., Barry and the Seven Veteran-Savvy Dwarves — and the biggest recent blunder, the Barry Zito contract, were mandated from on high. Getting rid of Sabean might not get rid of the problem, which is that ownership’s hyper-sensitivity to image seems to sway personnel decisions. (And which might prevent an independent thinker like DePo from signing on.)
But now with the blessing to rebuild (Magowan finally admitted yesterday fans need to have patience), I’m curious to see how Sabes plays out the year, giving young guys chances, trying to get value back for expensive veterans as he did for Matt Morris. The marketing clap-trap is distracting, but I see some recent movement toward the good, including a very strong draft and the willingness to spend money on guys like Lincecum and Villalona. (I noted a few other positives here.)
Is that pollyanna-ish? Would getting Paul DePodesta — or anyone other than Sabean — as general manager cure this franchise’s ills? Or has the rebuilding process gotten off to a good start? Discuss.
