Tonight could be a special night, with Brandon Webb trying to surpass Sal Maglie and Bob Gibson on his consecutive scoreless innings streak, currrently at 42. And we’re genuinely looking forward to it.

Last night wasn’t nearly as special, and it wasnt just because of the 7-4 loss to the Brewers in a game that wasnt that close.   

Sideline reporter Todd Walsh encountered a representative from AFLAC Tuesday evening, who we quickly learned partnered with the Diamondbacks to bring over a hundred kids from Phoenix Children’s Hospital to the game. Nice.

The thrust of the piece, and indeed of the entire nine inning telecast, was that Dbacks ownership is charitable, good hearted, community based, etc.  Which is fine, to a point. Every MLB franchise has a charitable arm and derives customer good will from strategically advertising that fact. While some hardliners might argue true charity is not boastful, even I recognize the corporate quid pro quo and dont begrudge it, in principle. Charity is charity, and charity is good. But at what point, practically speaking, does that customer good will become compromised by self-service,  or even cross over the line into exploitation?

Last night’s nine inning song and dance might prove instructive.

This was not an impromptu sit down with AFLAC, in the signature, off the cuff Walsh style. The rehearsed Diamondbacks’ production went on for several minutes and included taped footage of a pregame celebration for the patients at adjacent Sliders restaurant. Todd even egged on the AFLAC representative, "inquiring" if it was true that one youthful participant came "right from chemotherapy" to attend the event. The pleasant rep hesitated, smiling nervously, before confirming that fact. The live camera honed in on a young, bald child after Walsh had droned on about the newsworthiness of management’s generosity.

It wasnt until the end of the drawn out segment in the middle of a baseball game that we discovered AFLAC has similar partnerships with 18 clubs, including one established with the DBacks in 2001 during the Colangelo era. Does that make this donation any less appreciated by these kids? Of course not. But it does make it less newsworthy, I think. Less a reflection of noteworthy charitable initiative than Walsh’s segment, centered on this "development", tried to convey.   

This FO’s reputation has taken a mighty hit here in town. In particular, fans dont care for the righteous piety dripping from the talons of brothers Ken Kendrick and Jeff Moorad – and attendance has suffered accordingly. No big secret. So, last night, they grasped a large, blunt instrument and "designed" an entire telecast infused with nine innings of nuggets beating viewers over the head as to how righteous and wonderful the "brothers" really are.

"Beat over the head" too strong? Well, let’s see. There was a brief "announcement" about the St Mary’s Food Bank Alliance, a longstanding partner with this club and thousands of other valley businesses. (Since I have a blog, maybe I should take this "opportunity" to "announce" that I, too, volunteer regularly @ the Food Bank. Whoop de doo!) 

Friday’s Front Row Grill ran a sales promotion where Mark Grace "volunteered" to pay tabs, provided fans shelled out for the appropriate tickets.

There was the extended, over the top, Walsh/AFLAC "interview".

And then there was Mr Derrick Hall.

Under the smarmy guise of "being invited", the Team President strongarmed himself into the booth yet again to hand deliver a rapid fire series of carefully crafted, misleading "announcements". It seems he makes a "guest visit" essentially every game now. In forty years of watching baseball, I can honestly say I’ve never seen a baseball exec so cheerfully driven to distort reality, so desperate to shill his product entirely on his own self-servingly fabricated terms.   

In order to illustrate ownership’s family values, apparently, Hall went on at length, again with pretaped footage, showcasing what looked to be a chintzy, second rate kid’s play area shoehorned into the least accessible, upper level corner of the stadium, in part, because his languishing titty megabar – with the $20 separate admission just beyond center field – crowded out previous ownership’s play area for kids, established near that more desirable location.

Mr Hall’s big "announcement", however, was that the Diamondbacks will donate $5 of every ticket sold hereon out, to Diamondbacks Charities, up to $500,000. Sounds wonderful. What’s not to like? Well, that’s not all he said. The reason for this, according to Hall, was that current attendance so exceeded ownership’s expectations that they wanted to "reward" the fanbase for their allegiance with an "incredibly generous gesture". 

Let’s think about this.

Q: Has attendance exceeded ownership expectations?

A: Only they can say for sure, but it’s highly implausible, given stories in the local and national press about how a first place team is underdrawing a 111 loss predecessor, by about 4K every single night – in the same market, in the same stadium. It’s implausible given Sutton and Grace’s on air campaign that this team "deserves more" and Grace’s recent diatribe that current attendance is "unacceptable". The broadcasters are, after all, company employees, reporting directly to Hall. It’s implausible given Hall’s recent acknowledgement that gameday attendance wasnt commensurate with the team’s high TV ratings as a result of, according to him, a lack of fan awareness that he is evidently rather feverishly trying to rectify. So, this "decision" is not based on exceeded expectations. It is driven by something else.

Q: What is really driving this decision?

A: If I’ve accurately described management’s true position, it would seem that perhaps low attendance is driving their decision, exactly the opposite of Hall’s claim.

Q: Why would he "lie" about such a thing?

A:  Only Derrick knows for sure. Maybe pretending that attendance is excellent deflects from the fact it is not. Maybe pretending that fans already in attendance are somehow being "rewarded" deflects from the fact that this is a sales gimmick targeted at people who dont currently attend games. Perhaps a local journalist will inquire about these seeming contradictions.

Q: How does one "reward" fans by charging them the exact same price for tickets as before?

A: There’s no reward or tangible benefit to the fans here. One could argue there’s a psychological benefit, a philanthropic feeling of self esteem, but remember what Hall said. It’s not the fans who are "incredibly generous" here – it’s the owners. The fans role is to buy more tickets at regular club prices.

Q:  Why is the donation limit set at $500,000? Why cant it keep going if we keep buying tickets?

A: Most likely, because ownership has already earmarked this particular amount for charity and is now merely "tying" additional ticket sales to the previously budgeted write off. Basically an accounting gimmick to try and sell more tickets under false pretenses.

Q: You mean,  if I buy these so called "Charity Tickets", I’m not really donating to charity?   

A: It’s hard to say, without looking at the books. Even the US Congress had difficulty with that. But if it’s on the up and up, you’d think the team would be more than happy to open up the books to an inquisitive reporter who pursued the issue. And I wouldnt bet on that happening anytime soon.