Yes, I agree that the misery of the Red Sox fan and the Cubs fan are completely different. But I would argue that the Red Sox fan has it much worse. After all, is it more painful to root for a pathetic losing team year after year, or a team which periodically gets within reach of the brass ring, only to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Being a Cubs fan is like living with dull, steady, chronic pain; while being a Sox fan is like getting poked in the ribs with a sharp stick.
But this is the year :). I heard someone on the radio tout this theory: The Curse of the Bambino may have started when the Red Sox sold Babe Ruth to the Yankees, but it was finally lifted when the Yankees traded David Wells for Roger Clemens! The Curse of the Bambino was neutralized by the Curse of the Rocket!
“For what a man had rather were true, he more readily believes” - Francis Bacon
After watching last night’s game, I see you have failed to consider the ex-Cub factor.
Why in the world would any manager in his right mind have Rob “Blow the save” Beck come in and pitch in that situation?
I haven’t calculated it, but what is the ex-Cub component of each of the teams invovled in the LCS this year? I know all 4 teams have at least 1. Who’s up on this? (Although, for Atlanta, the ex-Cub factor doesn’t usually kick in until the World Series).
(Note: for those who don’t understand this curse, at one point, the late Chicago newspaper columnist Mike Royko did an analysis of something like 40 years of post-season play, and came to the conclusion that the team who had the most ex-Cub players usually came up short, with rare exception. He called this the “Ex-Cub factor.” I think he also concluded that a team had to have at least 3 or 4 of them for it to be a real factor, but I don’t recall the specifics).
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
SoxFan, it depends on why the player leaves the Cubs for it to matter, I am thinking. Atlanta has Greg Maddux, who was smart enough to leave the Cubs, so I doubt anyone in Atlanta considers him a liability. Now Rod BECK, on the other hand, …
And let us not forget the ever lovable Bill Buckner… < ducking, running and hiding… >
Ah, but look at Mr. Maddux’s post season record. Not exactly stellar.
The Braves seem to have the most ex-Cubs, at a glance. Boston has Mr. Beck, and if they keep pitching him, that may be enough to sink the Crimson hose. The Mets have Ordonez,the Yankees have Joe Girardi. Who am I missing?
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
Being a Cubs fan is like living with dull, steady, chronic pain; while being a Sox fan is like getting poked in the ribs with a sharp stick.>>> Mark Mal
I had to respond to this. What a great quote! (I added the bracketed portion to keep it in context, in that my Sox are White!)
But being a Cub fan is more than chronic pain; its acute pain. But Cub fans pay no attention to it because they are apparently brain dead.
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
<<And let us not forget the ever lovable Bill Buckner… < ducking, running and hiding… >>>
I can’t for the life of me understand why people keep harping on Bill Buckner. Let’s not forget: the Sox were up by two runs with two outs in the bottom of the 10th. But by the time the ball went through Buckner’s legs, the game was already tied. A clean play by Buckner would not have won the World Series for the Red Sox; it would have just sent the game into the 11th inning.
Far more deserving of blame for that whole fiasco were Calvin Schiraldi, who gave up three straight hits and a run which made the score 5-4; and, especially, Bob Stanley, who threw the wild pitch that allowed the Mets to tie the game.
Buckner was a fine veteren ballplayer with a respectable career (and who happened to be playing with an injury); but because of one error, he will forever be remembered as the punchline to a joke.
“For what a man had rather were true, he more readily believes” - Francis Bacon
Mark: Of course it was Buckner’s fault. It was also Schiraldi’s fault. It was also McNamera’s fault for not replacing Buckner with Stapleton for defense in the 9th. Can we go on now?
You’re still bitching about the Red Sox’ World Series loss in 1986. I’m concerned with more immediate pain, namely, how could my Tribe just implode like that in this year’s playoffs? I knew the Indians needed pitching, I just didn’t realize they didn’t have any pitching at all. (sigh)
As a Cleveland fan, if anymore Cub or Red Sox fans whine to me about either the length or quality of their suffering I’m going to take a Louisville Slugger to their heads. Of course, like Manny Ramirez, I’d probably just swing and miss.
Not that I’m bitter or anything.
Oh, well, in keeping with the non-pc logo of the Tribe, Let’s Go Braves.
Speaking of Atlanta, what’s up with Braves’ fans anyway? Tickets for game 3 in Fenway are going for $2000 a piece, but the Braves can’t even sell out Turner field for an NLCS game? Are Atlanta fans really that jaded? I’m trying to imagine the scenerio - two guys walking down the street in Atlanta:
“So what do you want to do?”
“I don’t know, what do you want to do?”
“Hey look - there are 6000 seats available for today’s pennant game against the Mets. Wanna go?”
“Nahhh. The Braves will just win like they always do. Let’s go bowling instead.”
Calvin Schiraldi, also an ex-Cub! (although I think he went to the Cubs after he was with the BoSox, but I find it ironic that the post season ills of the Red Sox seem inexorably tied to players who also wore Cubby/putrid blue.)
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
Veering ever-so-slightly back towards the topic, but not so sharply as to throw anybody off…
Can anyone explain the old divisional format of the National League? Chicago and St. Louis were in the Eastern Division, while Atlanta and Cincinatti were in the West. Why? While aligning the divisions with geographic accuracy would not have helped my beloved, pathetic Cubs, it would have eased a lot of heartbreak in LA and Cincinatti. I remember several years when the Eastern Division champion would have come in third (or worse!) in the Western Division. And while I suppose it would have become monotonous to see the Reds and the Dodgers in the playoffs year after year, at least it would have been a match-up of the league’s two best teams.
I believe my much-maligned Cubs put the lie to the “Great Man” theory. For 15 years or so we had Ernie Banks, as great a man as you could want, and they racked up some of their worst seasons. More recently we had Ryne Sandberg, clearly headed for the Hall, for a decade and a half and only broke .500 twice.
Of course, the “Great Team” theory doesn’t do much better. Those late '60s/early '70s teams had several Great Men – Banks, Williams, Santo, Jenkins – and an asortment of very good ones – Kessinger, Beckert, Hundley, Hands, Holtzman, Hickman – and again couldn’t win their division even once.
When the NL divisions were being sorted out in 1969, the team everybody wanted to have in their division, in order to get the extra gate, was St. Louis. They had just won 2 straight pennants. The Cards wanted to be in the same division as their rivals, the Cubs.
The Mets, who were supposed to suck, thought they would do better with the money that Cubs and Cardinal games would bring in.
Nobody particularly cared about Cincinnati and Atlanta, so they were shuffled off to the western division.
So, what happened, the Cardinals fell apart in 1969 and wouldn’t make it to the playoffs until 1982. The Mets won it all in 1969 and the Reds began their ascendancy in 1970.
Not exactly good long-term planning on the part of the Powers That Be in baseball. But they are not known for that.
Beruang: Obviously, the Cubs didn’t have a “great team” in 1969; at least not as great as the Mets!
BobT: You explanation works as good as any other, except that a straight geographic division of the NL would have preserved the Cubs/Card rivalry. I had heard that it worked this way: There was a desire to preserve many of the traditional rivalries from the old 8 team NL. The Phils and the Pirates also wanted to have the Cubs and Cards in their division. The Mets were automatically there because of geography, as well as the new Montreal club. I suppose they could have stuck the Mets in the West, but that would have been even more stupid (and the Mets had a lot of pull back then, being in NY and all). They could have put the Expos in the West, but then two expansion teams would have been in the West (and the AL tried that, and it didn’t work very well). So the two teams out in the cold and the east were the Reds and Braves.
The Braves had only recently moved to Atlanta, so the need to have the Braves tied to the traditions of the rest of the members of the NL east wasn’t so great. The Reds were in the smallest market in the NL, so it was easier to see who to ship out west.
The AL did it strictly by geography until the Senators became the Texas Rangers. Then, there was a choice between the White Sox and the Brewers as to who would move east. I believe the Brewers were chosen at that time becaue of the influence of NY. The Yankees were just becoming competitive, and the Sox were on the upswing with Chuck Tanner and Dick Allen. The powers of the AL east wanted the doormat Brewers instead of the more competitive White Sox.
SoxFan59
“Its fiction, but all the facts are true!”
However, after a year or two, the Brewers traded places with the Texas Rangers after they left DC.
My point with the NL split is that the Cardinals were the key to the whole split. Even though the Cardinals had won 2 straight pennants, other teams wanted them around because they were the hot ticket. However, as goes the Cardinals so went the Cubs.
OK, I can somewhat understand if you’re from Atlanta, or somthing like that, but, Dopers, aren’t you fucking sick of the Braves?!
Maybe I’m just bitter about '93, where my Giants won 103 games and lost to the Braves the WESTern division championship, but, jeez! I’d feel different if they had some good fans or something, but they can’t even sell out. At the risk of making this a bash-the-Braves Pit thread, but they are marketing. That’s it. The citizens of Atlanta support me on this, by not even minding to go to the postseason games.
BTW, fuck Kenny Rogers with a bat.
Well, they sold out the sixth game of the series, I know thats not alot, considering they didn’t sell out the earlier games, but the Atlanta fans are certainly spoiled, having their team win the division 8 years in a row.
I don’t think its all marketing, the team has been excellent for a long time, a tough thing to do in the modern baseball atmosphere.
I was rooting for them to beat the Mets. I wanted to see a Yankees-Braves world series. I believe whoever wins the series should be considered the team of the 90s. If you based everything on regular season records the Braves would have that honor right now. But, you don’t that is for sure. If the Braves beat the Yankees in the World Series, they will have an equal number of championships and based on their regular season accomplishments, I would consider them the team of the decade. On the other hand, if the Yankees win the World Series they will have won the most championships so they will, in my mind, be the team of the 90s. So, I think more than one season title is riding on this world series.
You can call the Cubs losers all you want, but noone comes close to my Phillies as far as losing goes, sure they got that title in 1980, but they have more last place finishes then any other team. They have been so bad, George Will found time to write a colummn about their losing sometime last year. They find such interesting ways to lose, as well. (I wasn’t born yet, in fact, it was ten years before I was considered, just hearing the year 1964 in relation to baseball, makes my skin crawl. For those who have never heard, the 1964 Phillies needed to win one of their last 10 games in order to get to the World Series. Gene Mauch overpitched his two best pitchers, and didn’t win one game, yuck.)
I agree with this, Dusty Baker does more with less, then any other manager around. He can always count on Bonds, but everything else seems to change from year to year, and he still keeps them winning. If they ever got a number one starter who could last, I would think they could go far.
pat
“Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the
impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be
the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible.
The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks.”
– Douglas Adams’s Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
