Master Index of Archived Threads


The results of this year's WS means ...

Frayed Knot Oct 31 2019 02:31 PM

... that MLB has, over the last 20 seasons, had 13 different WS champions and 20 different franchises who reached the WS in that time. Those numbers for the NFL, btw, are 12 and 19. For the NBA it's 9 and 14. In fact where MLB has had 13 champs in the last 20 years, the NBA has had their last 40 titles spread among just 13 different franchises. So you can see how well a salary cap promotes parity. I mean, it must be true since I hear it all the time. Getting back to baseball, this season's results also means that: -- the original Washington franchise (1901-1960 in DC; 1961-2019 in Minnesota) has three WS wins: 1924: Senators beat NYG 4-3; 1987: Twins beat Cardinals 4-3; 1991: Twins beat Braves 4-3 plus three other losing WS appearances: as WAS Senators in 1925 & 1933; as Twins in 1965 -- the current Washington franchise (1969-2004 as Montreal Expos; 2005-2019 as Nationals) obviously now has one WS win in their only WS appearance. -- but it's the middle Washington franchise (1961-1971 as Washington Senators; 1972-2019 as Texas Rangers) that remains winless. The Rangers did reach the WS in back to back seasons but lost to the Giants in Five games in 2010 and to the Cardinals in Seven in 2011 But during their 11 seasons in DC, the 'Senators II' (if you will) finished over .500 just once [86-76 in 1969] and never saw a post-season game. This series now reduces the number of franchises never to win a World Series to six: the aforementioned Senators/Rangers; the Rays/Devil Rays (1997-2019); San Diego Padres (1969-2019); Seattle Pilots/Milwaukee Brewers (1969-2019); Colorado Rockies (1993-2019); and the Seattle Mariners (1977-2019). And just by making the WS, the Nationals left those Mariners as the lone franchise never to even reach a World Series Closer to home, this year's Series leaves your New York Mets as the NL East team with the longest drought as WS winners (1986). This as compared to the Braves (1995), Marlins (2003), Phillies (2008), and Nationals (yesterday) - although not the longest stretch in the division without reaching a WS (2015); Braves (1999), Marlins (2003), Phillies (2009)

LWFS Oct 31 2019 08:11 PM Re: The results of this year's WS means ...

#meaningfulgamesinlateoctober

Centerfield Nov 01 2019 08:29 AM Re: The results of this year's WS means ...

Good analysis. I think it's hard to compare results over different sports. Baseball, by it's nature, is just more random than basketball. I would guess the same about football, but I don't watch nearly enough to make an assessment. Plus they have a one game winner take all playoff system so I'm sure that helps.

Edgy MD Nov 01 2019 08:55 AM Re: The results of this year's WS means ...

Speaking rather generally, an awesome MLB team wins 60+% of the time, an awesome NBA team wins 70+% of the time, and an awesome NFL team wins 80+% of the time. So it makes sense that there is going to be more variation and volatility in the final outcomes. There's more volatility baked into the pie.

nymr83 Nov 01 2019 10:51 AM Re: The results of this year's WS means ...

the Nationals left those Mariners as the lone franchise never to even reach a World Series it seems amazing that they never got there, they had one of the most star-studded teams I can remember with Ken Griffey jr, Alex Rodriguez, Edgar Martinez, & Randy Johnson

Edgy MD Nov 01 2019 12:05 PM Re: The results of this year's WS means ...

But they did win 116 games in 2001, the most ever. But that was before getting pied by the Yankees in the ALCS, four games to one. Playoffs shmayoffs.

Double Switch Nov 01 2019 12:48 PM Re: The results of this year's WS means ...

Edgy MD wrote: But they did win 116 games in 2001, the most ever. But that was before getting pied by the Yankees in the ALCS, four games to one. Apparently the Mariners have settled for being the team that "saved baseball" after the 1994-95 strike, the vaunted "Refuse to Lose" season.

Frayed Knot Nov 01 2019 01:37 PM Re: The results of this year's WS means ...

=Centerfield post_id=25686 time=1572618562 user_id=65]I think it's hard to compare results over different sports.

Agreed. But I get a kick out of the idea that while both those other sports allow more teams into the playoffs -- 16 & 12 vs 10 for MLB now and only 8 for much of this time since more than half of

this 20 year period was prior to the double-WC era (2000-2011) -- baseball manages to wind up with as large or larger pct of the league as champions, a larger pct as finalists, plus a smaller number

of teams on the outside looking in [4 MLB teams have failed to at least reach the sport's 'Final Four' (an LCS) over this same 20 yr period vs Nine in the NFL (nearly 30% of the league) and, like,

most of the league in the NBA, I didn't count how many] -- and yet talking heads on TV rarely fail to cite the salary cap as a magical means of ensuring parity with a cause and effect so obvious that

to deny or even even discuss it would be a waste of time.



btw, in addition to the Nationals, had the Dodgers, Braves, Twins, A's, or Rays won the title instead, each of them would have produced a 'new' champion for MLB as well (one not previously on the 20 year

list) while OAK, MIN, WAS, and ATL getting to the series would mean they'd join the list of new finalists as well whether they won the WS or not. So it's not just randomness within the playoff system which

is producing a wider array of winners, it's also a greater variety of teams simply getting into the mix despite that being a long been a standing complaint about baseball (same teams win every year ... it's boring).

Willets Point Nov 01 2019 01:39 PM Re: The results of this year's WS means ...

The 2001 Mariners are exhibit #1 in my case for why the pennant should be given as an award for the team with the best regular season record in each league rather than the team that advances to the World Series.