And Then There Were Four
by Matthew on Oct 20, 2008 9:39 AM PDT
in The More You Know
48 comments
PENNANTS WON SINCE SEATTLE JOINED MLB IN 1977
| Yankees | 9 |
| Braves | 5 |
| Cardinals | 5 |
| Dodgers | 4 |
| Athletics | 3 |
| Phillies | 3 |
| Red Sox | 3 |
| Blue Jays | 2 |
| Mets | 2 |
| Orioles | 2 |
| Royals | 2 |
| Indians | 2 |
| Twins | 2 |
| Tigers | 2 |
| Giants | 2 |
| Padres | 2 |
| Marlins | 2 |
| Astros | 1 |
| Pirates | 1 |
| Reds | 1 |
| Rockies | 1 |
| Rays | 1 |
| Angels | 1 |
| Brewers | 1 |
| Diamondbacks | 1 |
| White Sox | 1 |
| Expos/Nationals | 0 |
| Cubs* | 0 |
| Mariners | 0 |
| Nationals/Rangers | 0 |
* 10 Pennants won all time
0 recs |
48 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Pretty much aside from the Yankees,
it’s remarkably well balanced. And to think it’s baseball with the reputation for being top-heavy and not having parity.
by Matthew on Oct 20, 2008 9:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
A coworker and I were talking about baseball parity yesterday. World Series winners since 2000:
2000:Yankees
2001:D-Backs
2002:Angels
2003:Marlins
2004:Red Sox
2005:White Sox
2006:Cardinals
2007:Red Sox
2008:Rays or Phillies
Only 1 repeat in this decade so far. Pretty good.
by Goose on Oct 20, 2008 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We will always remember the moment we are crossed off this list
by Robert on Oct 20, 2008 9:52 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Do you have the whole game recorded?
Because holy hell do I need to watch that right now.
by MFAN on Oct 20, 2008 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You bet your ass I do
Watched it this morning
by Robert on Oct 20, 2008 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have it also...
The crowd was so loud the stadium shook and kept knocking the ball off its holder tee during the opening kickoff.
by Slica on Oct 20, 2008 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh and also...
Even more awesome, the Panthers are my 2nd favorite football team. By far my 2nd favorite.
So this was like a state of Euphoria most sports fans could never dream of.
by Slica on Oct 20, 2008 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
At 14 years,
it took the Rockies the longest of any on the 90s expansion teams to find it’s way to the series.
by JI on Oct 20, 2008 10:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
No fair giving the Cubs an asterisk
… and that would be the Washington Senators/Texas Rangers.
Where is Mick Kelleher when we need him?
by 3744nsheffield on Oct 20, 2008 11:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And Senators/Twins
and, oh, what the hell, Browns/Orioles.
by Paytheline on Oct 21, 2008 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh
That brings the suck into sharp focus.
by lemonverbena on Oct 20, 2008 12:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The sad part is...
there’s no reason to believe the Mariners are in any better position than those other 3 clubs.
by eponymous_coward on Oct 20, 2008 1:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The Ms have far more financial resources at their disposal than Washington or Texas.
That counts for a lot.
by Matthew on Oct 20, 2008 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes and no.
Sure I’ll grant we’re better off than either team. I’m just not sure how long that will last.
This season’s attendance wasn’t just the lowest ever at Safeco, it was the lowest in a non-strike season since before 1995. In fact, we’re not that far above 1991’s attendance:
2008: 2,329,702
1991: 2,147,905
Or, to give you another idea of where things are going: 2007’s attendance? Lower than 2004-2005.
You know about how you keep hearing “Gee, how come the Mariner fans keep showing up?” Well, they aren’t, actually. And attendance is usually a LAGGING indicator of team quality- teams usually have their best attendance the year AFTER a World Series win, and the Mariners cratered after 2004. If the team gets blown up this offseason… well, expect a Cleveland-style attendance collapse to 2 million or less.
by eponymous_coward on Oct 20, 2008 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please indicate where the Mariners have a financial disadvantage to either Texas or Washington.
by Matthew on Oct 20, 2008 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absent a time machine to let me look 10 years in the future, I can't do this.
I think we have an advantage now. I don’t know if we’ll have one in the future if we keep going into a ditch.
by eponymous_coward on Oct 20, 2008 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh my goodness Texas is stacked with under-24 talent.
by marc w on Oct 20, 2008 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All their pitchers are screwed.
If anyone needed a sinker-obsessed FO, they would be it. Instead they get Mr. High Heat, Nolan Ryan.
It's hard to convince people to let you eat them if you're an asshole. - Thingray
by Faux on Oct 20, 2008 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If they could only come up with a league average rotation...
by JI on Oct 20, 2008 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We had closer to a league average offense then they did league average rotation.
They have a long ways to go.
by Matthew on Oct 20, 2008 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But their offense is amazing
Our black hole is slightly less awful than their black hole… but their strength is SO much greater than our strength.
Speaking of which, what is our strength anyway?
by johnbai on Oct 20, 2008 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They have a long ways to go, but can identify the specific people
they’re counting on, or the specific prospects they believe can contribute.
Feliz/Andrus/Ramirez/Teagarden/Davis etc.
They just need regression to somewhere close to average from Nippert/Hurley and they’re in half-decent shape. Or for Andrus to push Young back to 2b.
by marc w on Oct 20, 2008 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
When Texas actually develops a starter than Jon Daniels doesn't subsequently trade away at low value
I’ll become concerned. Until then, there’s no reason the Mariners cannot recover faster and hold onto contention longer than the Rangers. They just to put the right people in charge.
by Matthew on Oct 20, 2008 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don't think Volquez's value is higher now?
by Matthew on Oct 20, 2008 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably.
I just meant that Volquez, Danks, Young have all had their value go up somewhat dramatically after being traded by Daniels.
by Matthew on Oct 20, 2008 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and moving Young and Danks
seemed silly at time
by JI on Oct 20, 2008 9:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say Josh Hamilton worked out rather nicely for them anyway
by seattlebruin on Oct 20, 2008 6:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Assuming good health
I’d say a flame throwing “#1” is worth more than an very good RFer.
by JI on Oct 20, 2008 7:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hammy could throw a ball as hard as Volquez or at least really close.
Tools Whore
Sign Bonds!
by Tyler on Oct 21, 2008 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, a StatCorner suggestion
seems like the blog needs a more prominent link back to the homepage
by seattlebruin on Oct 20, 2008 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The blog logo links to the blog. There is no SC logo on the data ferry blog.
by NOLAmarinergirl on Oct 20, 2008 8:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I take great solace in the fact that my suggestion was not entirely idiotic
thank you, NOLA
by seattlebruin on Oct 20, 2008 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
