Parity is a great thing in professional sports. It's what allows for stories like the '91 worst-to-first World Series and countless others. But while some cellar-dwellers have managed to become competitive again, others remain simply miserable.So I wondered, which teams have the longest active streak of non-winning seasons? Well, here you go...
0 seasons - Boston, Chicago White Sox, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles Angels, Los Angeles Dodgers, Minnesota, New York Mets, New York Yankees, Oakland, Philadelphia, San Diego, St. Louis, Toronto
1 season - Atlanta, Cleveland, Florida
2 seasons - Chicago Cubs, San Francisco, Texas
3 seasons - Arizona, Seattle, Washington/Montreal
4 seasons - Kansas City
6 seasons - Cincinnati, Colorado
9 seasons - Baltimore
10 seasons - Tampa Bay
14 seasons- Milwaukee, Pittsburgh
Here are some significant findings, first, among the teams that had winning seasons last year. The Red Sox have enjoyed 9 in a row, second only to the Yankees' 14 and both seem poised to add another in 2007. The Tigers, before last year's success, had endured 12 losing seasons in a row. And as I've mentioned before, Oakland is in danger of breaking an 8-year stretch of success.
Now to the losers. Atlanta, Cleveland, the Cubs, and Arizona seem like they'll get back to their winning ways this year, breaking brief droughts. I was definitely surprised Kansas City has only had 4 straight losing seasons, but after this year, they'll likely have had losing seasons in 13 of the last 14 years. And I thought Colorado and Cincinnati had been better, more recently.
Then there's the bottom of the barrel- the O's, Rays, Brewers, and Pirates.
Baltimore has to be good before too long with guys like Bedard, Guthrie, Roberts, Markakis, and Ray poised to enter their primes, if they're not already there. But they need to commit to a youth movement like Cleveland did a few years ago. Their unwillingness to do this keeps them just good enough to be bad. Not trading Miggy at the break was a mistake, and apparently, so was giving up on Gary Matthews Jr.
Tampa Bay is just a joke. In 10 seasons, their franchise record for wins is 70. They've never lost fewer than 90 games and they've had a top-10 pick in the draft each year for the last 8 (including two #1's)! How are they still this bad?!?! Here's why. They still have no pitching. Even though he allows way too many baserunners, Scott Kazmir has tremendous stuff and he's just 23, so they need to build the staff around him. But each year, starters 2 through 5 are a question mark. James Shields has been good but not great this season, and he's struggled mightily in the second half (1-2, 8.44). And Edwin Jackson (2-11, 6.56) may be one of the worst starters in baseball this year. Maybe they're loaded with arms in double and triple-A, because they're sure not in the big leagues.
Conrats Brew crew! Unless you lose 30 of your last 53, you'll break a 14-year streak of .500 or worse. And they're doing it with good, home-grown talent (Fielder, Braun, Hart, Hardy, Gallardo) but they need Sheets back desperately.
Then there's Pittsburgh. They're going to make it 15 in a row this year, and probably 16 in a row in 2008. They have no pop, they don't run, and they're not exciting, but at least they can pitch...a little. Snell has been much better than his 7-9 record, Gorzelanny has been a very nice surprise, and Maholm and Duke are better than they've been. So maybe the Pirates won't be bad for much longer. Then again, they were probably thinking that 12 years ago.
3 comments:
"Not trading Miggy at the break was a mistake."
What would you have had them do? I don't know that there was even any interest in him.
Maybe failing to trade Miggy last season was the mistake. But the package they were getting (Ervin Santana and Eric Aybar) certainly hasn't performed. Sure they would have a 23 year old SS and a 24 starter, but if those two aren't ready in 2008 and 2009, then you've wasted your window with Bedard and Roberts (both are FA's at the end of '09).
The window for this team to be competitive is the next two years. And I don't see how trading Tejada and "committing to a youth movement" helps that.
Hey, Pittsburgh just got Matt Morris, I think that's meaning they're turning a corner. Right? What Matt Morris sucks and is old and makes to much money and they were doing the Giants a favor by taking him off their hands. Maybe the Pirates won't be good anytime soon.
What I'm saying is, the Orioles, much like the Nationals giving Dmitri Young a multi-year extension, don't have any sort of long term plan. Even the Tejada signing, while good for PR at the time, was a bit of a head-scratcher. He didn't instantly make them a contender. He's a franchise guy (or was), but wasn't walking into a situation where he was the missing piece to a playoff puzzle. And in the years that followed, I don't think the O's have made much of an effort to get anything for him. The reality is, we have no idea what they would have been able to get at this past deadline from teams like the LA Angels, Red Sox, Cubs, Padres, etc.
And who's to say Bedard and Roberts wouldn't stick around if the O's got the ship moving in the right direction between now and 2009?
The problem is, the O's have NEVER been willing to commit to the future, as evidenced by the signings of guys like: Joe Carter ('97, 38 years old), Doug Drabek ('97, 35 years old) Will Clark ('98, 35 years old), Rich Amaral ('98, 37 years old), David Segui ('00, 34 years old), Pat Hentgen ('00, 32 years old), Marty Cordova ('01, 32 years old), BJ Surhoff ('03, 38 years old, then again in '04, 39 years old), Rick Helling ('03, 32 years old), Omar Daal ('03, 31 years old), Javy Lopez ('04, 33 years old), Rafael Palmeiro ('04, 39 years old), Sammy Sosa ('05, 36 years old), Steve Reed ('05, 40 years old), Jeff Conine ('06, 40 years old), Russ Ortiz ('06, 32 years old), John Halama ('06, 34 years old), Kevin Millar ('06, 34 years old), Jay Payton ('07, 34 years old), Aubrey Huff ('07, 30 years old), Steve Trachsel ('07, 36 years old), Jamie Walker ('07, 35 years old).
That's not one or two bad signings (it's 22 actually). That's one or two bad signings of a 30+ year old player, every season, for 10 years in a row! If they have a need somewhere, the Orioles would rather go get a player who is well-past his prime, and in most cases, has very few productive years left, than tell a guy in triple-A, "show us you belong here." And that's why they've been stagnant for the last decade.
What they really should do is gut the whole damn team- Tejada, Roberts, Bedard, everybody who's worth anything...get rid of them while the interest is still high (kind of like what Billy Beane did with Tim Hudson and Mark Mulder a few years ago). Then tell the fans, we're going to rebuild for the next few years so we can be good in 2010. But they won't do that. They'll go sign somebody like Mike Sweeney to play first for them this off-season, then wonder why Roberts, Bedard, and Markakis can't wait to get the hell out of town.
Post a Comment