Minnesota Twins will now officially recognize their Washington history

[MNTwins]

New at Target Field this year will be banners recognizing the 1924 WS title, 1925 and 1933 AL titles. They will be flown alongside the Twins' 1965 AL banner and 1987 and 1991 WS banners. 

 

 

Also this quote from the article doesn't seem accurate to me as I thought the Twins always retained the original Washington stats and history. 

 

Quote

“I think you’ve got to go back and tell the story of when the Senators moved to Minnesota, MLB put an expansion team in Washington,” St. Peter said. “I wasn’t here at the time. I don’t know what led to the discussion, I don’t know what the politics were, but for some reason the history of the Senators franchise did not travel with it to Minnesota. They left it in Washington with the expansion team. All the records, everything else, by MLB rules stayed there and ultimately with the move (of the second Senators) to Texas (in 1972) for some period of time.”

 

Regardless, further plans are still being explored to expand recognition of the 60 years of Washington history, likely including recognition of legendary pitcher Walter Johnson. 

 

https://www.skornorth.com/2020/07/history-lesson-twins-taking-steps-to-recognize-franchises-time-in-washington/

[The_Admiral]

Yeah, I'm not so sure about that one. I thought the Twins always had the rights to the 1901-1960 Senators, they just chose not to do much with it because the Senators usually sucked.

[SFGiants58]

15 minutes ago, the admiral said:

Yeah, I'm not so sure about that one. I thought the Twins always had the rights to the 1901-1960 Senators, they just chose not to do much with it because the Senators usually sucked.

I thought the same. Heck, we can’t even agree on their name for their full run. 
 

I opt to call them the Senationaltors.

[OnWis97]

I think St. Peter's wrong about that. I can find lots of stats sites (albeit I don't know how "official") that show Walter Johnson as the all-time wins leader in franchise history.  I don't think those Senators have ever been connected to today's Rangers.  Of course by today's standards, that's how it would have probably happened.

 

I think the Twins have simply chosen to not reference the history much, if at all.

 

I like the decision.  I am sure people will mock it as trying to add another title or something...but at the risk of opening up a debate, that's the history...just like the Dodgers and Giants (with the primary difference being keeping the name and pre-relocation success). Pretty good off-the-field summer for the the Twins between this and taking down the statue of Calvin Griffith. 

[LMU]

Any acknowledgement of real history instead of the recent retcon that happens all the time *cough*CLEVELANDBROWNS*cough* is perfectly fine in my book.

[TrueYankee26]

I am surprised they have not done it before, it is not like the Yankees when they were the Baltimore Orioles in 1901-02

[OnWis97]

In MLB which has, I believe, always adhered to the "franchise model" and not the "Hornets/Pelicans/Bobcats/Hornets" model or even the "Browns" it seems like keeping the name leads to more historic recognition, along with success and longevity.  The Giants, Dodgers, and Athletics all kept their names, unlike the Senators/Twins.  And I know the Dodgers and Giants recognize their previous locations.  I guess I'm not sure about the A's.  The Philly A's are probably not quite as important as the others because of the Giants' success and the importance of the Dodgers (Jackie Robinson, in particular) and the KC A's are kind of a blip.  That said the A's and Twins are original AL franchises and while they don't need to revere their old locations as much as their current, they don't need to be the OKC Thunder and pretend there's no pre-relocation history.  I think with the A's, it's more obvious to fans because of the name.

 

Among name-changers, the Twins were probably the change with the most pre-move longevity, plus there was one championship.  Most others that changed names don't have nearly the length of history and no championships.  Quite a while for the St. Louis Browns (with no AL pennants, I think, which makes it a bit more difficult). Otherwise you're looking at shorter stints like the second Senators, the pre-Yankees O's, the pre-Browns Brewers (1 year), the Pilots.  The Expos were around for quite a while and had some really good players (that I think the Nats just started honoring in terms of retired numbers).

 

Anyway, my stance has always been not to play "musical history" regardless of whether the team touts it.  But I think it's nice for a team like the original Sens to be acknowledged (whereas today's O's don't need to nod to the 1901 Brewers).

[ManillaToad]

4 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

Quite a while for the St. Louis Browns (with no AL pennants, I think, which makes it a bit more difficult).

Browns won the pennant in 1944

[The_Admiral]

Oddly enough, back during Contraction Fever, I believe the state legislature passed a law that if the Twins relocated or were contracted, the Twins' history would be retained for an expansion team to pick back up.

 

It would have been nice for the Nats to retain the Expos' retired numbers, Andre Dawson and Gary Carter were certainly worth the honor.

[BC985]

10 hours ago, ManillaToad said:

Browns won the pennant in 1944

I don’t believe the Orioles acknowledge this. Personally, I would like to see the Cardinals have something at Busch Stadium commemorating the Browns pennant in the name of St. Louis baseball history. They do have a George Sisler statue and sell some Browns merch, but at the same time that pennant belongs to the Orioles as a franchise. 

[leopard88]

1 hour ago, BC985 said:

I don’t believe the Orioles acknowledge this. Personally, I would like to see the Cardinals have something at Busch Stadium commemorating the Browns pennant in the name of St. Louis baseball history. They do have a George Sisler statue and sell some Browns merch, but at the same time that pennant belongs to the Orioles as a franchise. 

 

The Orioles website includes Browns players among the various all-time leaders in statistical categories (ex., George Sisler is No. 3 all time in hits).  However the "Postseason Results" section of the website does not include the 1944 World Series and the list of managers begins with Jimmie Dykes in 1954.

 

On an unrelated note, the list of MLB Hall of Fame Inductees includes John McGraw based on his term as manager in 1901-02 (which time was spent with the current Yankees franchise).  

[GhostOfNormMacdonald]

I've toured target field before and they have the 1924 trophy there so it only makes sense that they publicly acknowledge what they've always privately acknowledged 

[sportsfan7]

5 hours ago, BC985 said:

I don’t believe the Orioles acknowledge this. Personally, I would like to see the Cardinals have something at Busch Stadium commemorating the Browns pennant in the name of St. Louis baseball history. They do have a George Sisler statue and sell some Browns merch, but at the same time that pennant belongs to the Orioles as a franchise. 

I wouldn't normally mind the Cardinals commemorating this, but the team the Browns played in the 1944 World Series was the Cardinals and I think it would be kinda weird to acknowledge that.

[BC985]

1 hour ago, sportsfan7 said:

I wouldn't normally mind the Cardinals commemorating this, but the team the Browns played in the 1944 World Series was the Cardinals and I think it would be kinda weird to acknowledge that.

 

Typically I would agree with you, but the Cardinals celebrate the Browns in their museum. The 1944 World Series is especially revered because it was an all St. Louis series. The current Cardinals ownership has ties to the Browns as it was Chairman Bill DeWitt Jr’s batboy uniform that Eddie Gaedel wore when he became the shortest person to appear in a major league game. 

[OnWis97]

On 7/8/2020 at 10:45 PM, the admiral said:

Oddly enough, back during Contraction Fever, I believe the state legislature passed a law that if the Twins relocated or were contracted, the Twins' history would be retained for an expansion team to pick back up.

I can’t fathom that would be enforceable.  My understanding is that when Target Field was funded, this was part of the deal and MLB agreed to it.

[kmccarthy27]

On 7/8/2020 at 11:45 PM, the admiral said:

 

 

It would have been nice for the Nats to retain the Expos' retired numbers, Andre Dawson and Gary Carter were certainly worth the honor.

I thought they did: https://www.mlb.com/nationals/history/retired-numbers

[The_Admiral]

Although each of these numbers remain in circulation with the Nationals, here is a look at the numbers retired by the Expos:

I particularly remember being annoyed that Raines's #30 came back for middle reliever Mike Stanton.

 

The Nats made a big show out of their Tarp Of Washington-Based Legends out in right at at RFK, but I would have liked maintaining some continuity with the Expos, since that tends to be the way it goes with baseball franchises.

[SFGiants58]

Well, we’re in a post-1994/95/96 NFL Relocations world. City continuity is more marketable and “respectful” than franchise continuity (when there’s not a replacement team).

[Lights Out]

I'd say it depends on how the franchise left town. In the Nationals' case, there's really no use in bringing up all the bad memories of the Loria era, the failed San Juan experiment, the contraction threat, the league blatantly sabotaging the Expos in a playoff race by not allowing them to make September call-ups, etc. Especially now that they've won a championship in their new market. Why bother keeping all those negative associations from another city?

[The_Admiral]

I observe the franchise continuity. People said the Cubs winning the World Series would bring about the end of the world but it's pretty clear that the Expos winning the World Series is what did it.