Guest Brian Report post Posted September 12, 2004 I'll always remember Dusty fucking things up in that series. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted September 12, 2004 You can without a doubt name the team that won the 1961 World Series. Can you name the team they beat? What about '27? The Oakland A's were a dynasty in the early 70s. Can you name all three teams they beat without looking it up or being an A's fan? I sure as hell can't. As "thrilling" as winning the league is, if you can't win it all, you get all the honor of being an obscure trivia question. So what? Is Team B 'TEH SUXORS' if they, god forbid, lose the game? Someone's gonna lose eventually. Oh and for the record, I can name the last 25 World Series off the top of my head before going to the internet to look it up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Oh pointless post continued................... '92 Jays over Braves '91 Twins over Braves '90 Reds over A's '89 A's over Giants '88 Dodgers over A's '87 Twins over Cards '86 Mets over Red Sox '85 Royals over Cards '84 Tigers over Padres '83 O's over Phillies '82 Cards over Brewers '81 Dodgers over Yankees '80 Phils over Royals '79 Pirates over O's Now I can go to the Almanac, but hell why claim to be a fan of baseball when you're really just a Yankee or Red Sox fan and nothing else? Hell WWE (you know how concerned everyone is with building BOTH guys up) really 'fake' versus that logic? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted September 12, 2004 You can without a doubt name the team that won the 1961 World Series. Can you name the team they beat? What about '27? The Oakland A's were a dynasty in the early 70s. Can you name all three teams they beat without looking it up or being an A's fan? I sure as hell can't. As "thrilling" as winning the league is, if you can't win it all, you get all the honor of being an obscure trivia question. So what? Is Team B 'TEH SUXORS' if they, god forbid, lose the game? More or less. There's very little honor or prestige in being number two or blowing it on the big stage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Gee, in that case, why whatch baseball at all? I mean hell in of the five teams in the NL Wildcard race, four are not gonna make it so OMG TEHY SUXORS!!!!!!. Then you have Anaheim and Boston still alive for their division, so (counting the Yankees and the A's) one of the four won't make it. Then you got eight playoff teams, seven of which won't win, OMG TEHY SUXORS TOO!!!!!!!! So we have twelve teams that suck, then the other 17 teams just blow in no uncertain terms. So why put yourself through the torture of watching baseball for six months? The baseball playoffs, contrary to everybody's opinion, sucked last year because everybody except the Marlins lost. That's your logic, congrats.................... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 You can without a doubt name the team that won the 1961 World Series. Can you name the team they beat? What about '27? The Oakland A's were a dynasty in the early 70s. Can you name all three teams they beat without looking it up or being an A's fan? I sure as hell can't. As "thrilling" as winning the league is, if you can't win it all, you get all the honor of being an obscure trivia question. The scary thing is I could name all those teams from memory. More or less. There's very little honor or prestige in being number two or blowing it on the big stage. I've always disagreed. Of course the ultimate goal is to win the World Series. But upsets happen, and there are some memorable teams that did not win the World Series. I look at the sum of all achievements. Of course winning the World Series is the biggest accomplishment, but it is not the only accomplishment. I think it is ultimately about the journey. The 1950 Phillies were swept in four games in the World Series. But they also won one of the greatest pennant races of all time, and that is a memorable achievement. We remember the 1975 Red Sox for taking the Big Red Machine to the limit. Or for something more recent, the 2002 Oakland A's winning 20 games in a row. Of course they did not win the big prize, but that does not mean these teams achieved things worth remembering. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KingPK 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 I can see AS' point of view, but it's a POV that only Yankees fans can have. Since the team has won so many championships, and are perennial favorites every year, anything less than a championship is a failure. There's a bit of that in Patriots fans right now; in a lot of fans minds, if they don't win it sll this year, they will be a failure, like the '02 team. I wouldn't want to live with that POV myself, of course. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Did the Yankees' loss in the Series last year prevent the ALCS from being 'classic-ized'? Hell when you bring up the Mariners' 116, yeah they didn't even go the Series much less win it, but the only asterisk possibly going on it is that it was a 162-game season, not 154. Besides how many teams in the WC era have won the World Series--or got there--after having the best record during the season? Yankees, Indians, that it? And, the 'what goes up comes down' (hard in most cases) cycle is inevitable. Remember the other team's out there playing too--what, are we gonna find a way for both teams to win the game? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted September 12, 2004 (edited) Gee, in that case, why whatch baseball at all? Because you want your team to be the best and you want to watch while they do it. I mean hell in of the five teams in the NL Wildcard race, four are not gonna make it so OMG TEHY SUXORS!!!!!! Uh, yeah. What's to be proud of there? That they "almost made it?" That they weren't the absolute worst team in their league? "Well, my team kind of contended there for a little while!" Well, whoopdie fucking do. I guess it's almost like being World Champions. Then you got eight playoff teams, seven of which won't win, OMG TEHY SUXORS TOO!!!!!!!! I prefer the term "failures" They don't have to suck, but they certainly failed. They failed to reach their ultimate goal. No team should be satisfied with "almost". If you're satisfied with "almost" you turn into the Atlanta Braves. A walking, breathing 25 man punchline. Thirteen straight division titles and one championship. But hey, they get there every year. Edited September 12, 2004 by Anglesault Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Does anyone honestly watch a sports team play to "almost win"? I think everyone wants the team(s) they follow to win the world series (or in other cases Superbowl, Stanley Cup, and NBA Finals). That doesn't mean you shouldn't cheer for a bad team, but who honestly watches a team to lose? You want them to win. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mik 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Don't look now, but the Phillies are 4.5 games out of the wild card. ESPN.com is already calling the race a "six pack". Keep in mind, they have 7 games remaining with the Marlins, which should account for 6-7 losses, so maybe we shouldn't consider them just yet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GreatOne Report post Posted September 12, 2004 You're missing one thing altogether:, which is my whole point: if you're a BASEBALL fan, let's forget who's a Yankee, Red Sox, Mariner, or A's fan for a second. My team's going to a mass offseason overhaul, which they should have had the moment it appeared I could outrun either Edgar Martinez or John Olerud to first. Does that mean I'm not interested in the playoffs? HELL NO. Sault, you've made it quite clear you're just a Yankee fan and not a BASEBALL fan--which you're certainly entitled to. But just because somebody chooses to be a fan beyond their team, they're not any less of one, the opposite is true as a matter of fact. Hell I might have have gotten into a huge-ass argument with Al back in July over Pedro: stay or go, but I respect Al as a BASEBALL fan or else he'd be subjecting us to 'the Philadelphia Phillies report' every week. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Sault, you've made it quite clear you're just a Yankee fan and not a BASEBALL fan. Is that so? Because if I was merely a Yankee fan and not a fan of baseball, I think i could have spared myself a shitload of time, money and energy this summer. If I only cared about what the Yankees do, I would wait for the little bottom line on ESPN. or look in the headline of a newspaper the next day. Why the hell would I spend three hours a night watching the damn game? Why even bother going to Yankee Stadium? Or Fenway? Or ::shudders:: the Vet? Hell, what was I doing spending the night in Durham North Carolina watching the Durham Bulls play a double header against the Richmond Braves? For someone who doesn't like baseball, that's five hours of my vacation thrown to hell. I fail to see how wanting my team to win it all makes me a non baseball fan. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Let's see...I spent 5 hours today watching the Cubs/Marlins on WGN and Yankees/Orioles on YES, and usually watch at least one game a day (if able to). Just because I root for a certain team makes me a non-baseball fan? I'll watch any game I can, but I prefer watching the Yankees. I'm sorry if the big bad Yankees have a reputation of being the best team. I use to follow the Colorado Rockies until I stopped caring about the NL West, and they were never a great team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brett Favre 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 It just depends the type of team you root for. If you root for the Yankees, you expect championships, simple. In the NBA in 1999 the Knicks proved the "experts" wrong and made it to the NBA Finals. Yeah they lost in the finals, but the miracle run was one of the most enjoyable sports experiences i've ever had. To me, we didn't fail, we exceeded the expectations. It just depends who you root for and what you expect, simple as that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted September 12, 2004 It just depends the type of team you root for. If you root for the Yankees, you expect championships, simple. In the NBA in 1999 the Knicks proved the "experts" wrong and made it to the NBA Finals. Yeah they lost in the finals, but the miracle run was one of the most enjoyable sports experiences i've ever had. To me, we didn't fail, we exceeded the expectations. It just depends who you root for and what you expect, simple as that. It's more the type of fan you are than the team itself. If I followed the Knicks, I wouldn't be satisfied with a Finals loss. I'd be happy that they weren't the dregs of the league, but I wouldn't be throwing a party. In the end, it was just a longer choke than expected. Some fans are satisfied when their team isn't dead last (Tampa Bay). Some are happy if they're a little bit better than last year (Detroit). Some are happy if they at least have meaningful games in August (Texas). And then there are fans that are happy with their team making the playoffs or world series or what ever even when they don't win (Atlanta) And then there's me. I feel that if you are playing a game to win something, anything short of winning that means you have failed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted September 12, 2004 If I followed the Knicks, I wouldn't be satisfied with a Finals loss. I'd be happy that they weren't the dregs of the league, but I wouldn't be throwing a party. In the end, it was just a longer choke than expected. I think it was the fact that no team in history that was ranked #8 made it to the finals, and that it was important because it was a triumph over the odds stacked against them. Look at the Marlins. Did ANYONE seriously give them, a club 4 years old, a shot at the World Series in 1997? I sure as heck didn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mik 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 I did. I won over $300 as a High School junior by betting all my classmates the Marlins all the way through. One kid bet me $50 that the Marlins would get swept by the Braves in the NLCS. I got paid after Game 1. I just remember watching the Jim Leyland press conference before the season thinking that this year was going to be special. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted September 12, 2004 I would've lost that one too. Once the Indians knocked off the Yankees I was sure enough of another Clevland/Atlanta World Series I would've bet money on it. Thank God I didn't start doing that until the Subway (World) Series. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Look at the Marlins. Did ANYONE seriously give them, a club 4 years old, a shot at the World Series in 1997? Fuck yeah. Do you remember who was on that team? It certainly wasn't your typical expansion team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Look at the Marlins. Did ANYONE seriously give them, a club 4 years old, a shot at the World Series in 1997? Fuck yeah. Do you remember who was on that team? It certainly wasn't your typical expansion team. I honestly don't remember much. I didn't really care for the Marlins and thought the Rockies would've been a better team down the line. I lost that one too. Someone enlighten me on the roster the Marlins had going into the 1997 Playoffs? I have a vague idea, but I don't want to spout off the wrong season roster. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Someone enlighten me on the roster the Marlins had going into the 1997 Playoffs? http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/FLA/1997.shtml Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mik 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Let's take a trip down memory lane. Al Leiter Kevin Brown Livan Hernandez Alex Fernandez (17 wins, whose team record Carl Pavano just tied) Robb Nen Charles Johnson Luis Castillo as a young backup Craig Counsell Edgar Renteria Bobby Bonilla Moises Alou Gary Sheffield (my boyhood idol and the reason I wore 10 from Little League through High School) Jeff Conine Cliff Floyd off the bench Darren Daulton off the bench I can't think of the CF. (Thanks Anglesault ... Devon White) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted September 12, 2004 At least I had some of the right (top) players in my mind. I honestly forgot Shef' was on the Marlins in '97, and that Kevin Brown was with them period. He seemed to bounce around every year or two. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mik 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Came within a hit batter away from a perfect game that year against the SF Giants. Not sure if he still faced the minimum 27 or if it was 28. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted September 12, 2004 It must've sucked to be a Marlins fan after that though. The next year that roster was pretty much stripped away of almost anyone with talent or that had a large sticker price attached to them. Then, for some reason, they trade the Dodgers like 3 players for Mike Piazza, then trade him about 3 weeks later to the Mets. I'm pretty sure Sheffield was part of that trade, but I'm not too 100% sure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Anglesault Report post Posted September 12, 2004 Came within a hit batter away from a perfect game that year against the SF Giants. Not sure if he still faced the minimum 27 or if it was 28. 28. San Francisco Giants AB R H RBI BB K PO A Hamilton cf 4 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 Vizcaino ss 3 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 Snow 1b 3 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 Bonds lf 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 Kent 2b 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Hill rf 2 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 Benard rf 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 Lewis 3b 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Berryhill c 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 Mueller ph 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VanLandingham p 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 Carlson p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Javier ph 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 27 0 0 0 0 7 27 9 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bored 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 1997 Marlins Postseason Roster C: Charles Johnson 1B: Darren Daulton/Jeff Conine 2B: Craig Counsell 3B: Bobby Bonilla SS: Edgar Renteria LF: Moises Alou CF: Devon White RF: Gary Sheffield Bench: Jim Eisenreich, Kurt Abbott, John Cangelosi, Greg Zaun, Cliff Floyd, John Wehner Starting Rotation Kevin Brown Al Leiter Livan Hernandez Tony Saunders Bullpen Robb Nen Jay Powell Felix Heredia Antonio Alfonseca Dennis Cook Ed Vosberg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mik 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 It must've sucked to be a Marlins fan after that though. The next year that roster was pretty much stripped away of almost anyone with talent or that had a large sticker price attached to them. Then, for some reason, they trade the Dodgers like 3 players for Mike Piazza, then trade him about 3 weeks later to the Mets. I'm pretty sure Sheffield was part of that trade, but I'm not too 100% sure. Yeah, it was terrible. But it produced the 2003 world championship and at least + .500 team for at least the next 4-5 years. They got a boatload of prospects, lots of them turned into complete winners. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mik 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2004 I don't even remember Tony Saunders, or who he was. And he was a postseason starter. Very strange. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
