2013 MLB Discussion Thread, Redux

[infrared41]

It's a shame that the teams involved in the World Series are such a turn-off for people. From a pure baseball perspective, this match-up is a really good one. Based on their regular season records, this World Series will have the two best teams in the game facing off for all the marbles. Isn't that how it's supposed to work out? It makes me wonder how many of these same people who are unhappy with a Cards - Red Sox WS will end up in one of the football threads complaining because the two best teams in football (College and/or NFL) are sitting home while lesser teams play for the title. I can see it now...

The 8-8 Cowboys win the NFC East while a 10-6 team doesn't make the playoffs. That will result in the inevitable "the NFL needs to fix this so 8-8 teams don't get in at the expense of a better team" argument. (Kinda like when 7-9 Seattle won the NFC West a few years back, ruined New Orleans' season, and the NFL in the process.) The outrage will escalate with every Cowboys win in the playoffs culminating in a complete boards meltdown when the 8-8 Cowboys face the 9-7 New England Patriots in the Super Bowl while 13-3 Denver and 12-4 Seattle are sitting at home. The cries of "a championship should feature the best teams, not two teams who got hot at the right time" will ring throughout the boards-land. Of course some smart-ass like infrared41 will reply with "that's funny, you weren't saying anything of the sort when the two best teams in baseball were in the World Series."

Just an observation.

[Sport]

I've never cared about the two best teams playing in the championship round. Unless it's a flat out bad team like the 06 Cardinals I don't really care how their regular seasons went.

It'll probably be good baseball, but when it's played by two teams I couldn't want to lose more then I have no interest in watching it.

If I have to pick one, I want Johnny Gomes and David Ross to get rings so Red Sox I guess.

[STL FANATIC]

Let's be honest. If that was a different 83-win team that won it in 2006, that wouldn't bother you that much either.

For the record, because that team keeps being mentioned, I feel the need to at least say this. That 2006 team was NOT bad. They were a team at the kinda sort end of the strong core that lead to amazing teams in 2004 & 2005 and were devastated by injuries all season.

They benefitted from a weak division but also had a knack for winning to remain in first any time it was challenged. They did not end the season strong, but by the time October rolled around, many of the players who had battled injuries all year were finally healthy, or the team had finally found a replacement to fill the void. Keep in mind also, that while it's not a huge improvement, that team only played 161 games due to rained out game against the 76-85 Giants that didn't need to be made up. They would have had a chance to hit 84 wins.

My point isn't however, that they were an amazing team all year long with a misleading record. It's that what they did in October wasn't that surprising if you paid attention to what ailed them all season and what no longer was. They weren't just a lucky team in October (though all teams who advance in baseball benefit from luck), they were a GOOD team in October.

Trust me, I understand how an 83-win rival winning the whole thing is annoying as heck, but it wasn't undeserved. And if you're okay with a post-season tournament where the best team doesn't necessarily come out on top, you have to accept situations like that.

Personally, I'd rather have less teams and have the best teams compete. Playoffs are fun, so I'm not sure how much I'd want to modify it, but on principle I love the idea of the old system. The best team from each league plays each other, period. And I say that knowing it would have invalidated the two World Championships I've seen in my life.

Outsiders rarely like seeing the best teams win because it's boring. It's kind of why the NBA gets boring sometimes (as basketball is the game with the least chance involved, especially considering the NBA utilizes series and not single-game elimination).

I get that.

But there's also something to be said for rewarding the best and seeing the best go at it. There's no "right" answer, so I tend to accept whatever the established systems are. Every now and then it's nice to see a random system still churn out a matchup of the best, though.

[The_Admiral]

Honestly, that 2006 team didn't bother me much because it felt like a continuation of the 2004/2005 teams.

[worcat]

I don't understand all the hate for the Cardinals? Not just here but any site (Yahoo, espn etc). Cardinals are a classy team and organization. I can understand people hating on them for constantly contending but same goes for Boston. What gives? Am I missing something?

Any team that consistently contends will get hate, the Cardinals have consistently contended since the turn of the century. They've managed to do this yet somehow remain the 'small guy' in most of the media coverage, with the focus consistently managing to ignore that they regularly have one of the biggest payrolls in the league. They're also just a flat out irritatingly competent organisation, who always seem to magically produce some guy from the minor leagues to step up and do exactly the job required really rather better than anyone expected. On top of all this they also seem to be a persistent dream-killer in recent years, ending the seasons of so many actual underdog teams, whose fans were daring to dream for the first time in years, only to get steamrollered by the endless Cardinal juggernaut.

Then there's the smuggest, most self-congratulatory fanbase in all of baseball...

I completely understand how certain fans can 'hate' the cardinals for always being in contention but at the same time, why aren't they respected for doing it the right way?

Yes I am a Cardinals fan, and I appreciate how successful our team has been in my lifetime. The Cardinals play the game the right way and produce our own players through the system - not purchase a championship like the Yankees or Dodgers (as of late).

I understand certain cities being up when we 'dream kill' under dog seasons but recently, from any Pirates fan I encountered or read comments from, they were more than grateful just to make the playoffs and spoke highly of the Cardinals fans and a great series. Sure they would have preferred to win and maybe it says something about the Pirates fan base but I would have been in the same mindset had the Cardinals lost. So I can't understand why people hate the a team for winning, the best team should win regardless of the story line.

Once again going back to raising our own talent and not pursuing high market free agents - how can you say we are one of the highest payrolls? Yes we were the underdog against the Dodgers considering our payroll is by far less and much lesser known players across the country.

As far as the fan comment I couldn't disagree with you more. Fans in St. Louis are very die hard and dedicated but I would not go that far. I'm sure to the rival fan base we may be annoying but the feeling is mutual when you look at heavy market teams such as Chicago, New York, Los Angeles etc. The Cardinals have a very large following, not only in Missouri but the Mid-West in general. Truly one of the teams that deserves the "Nation" title (Cardinals Nation, Dodgers Nation...not Marlins Nation). Do we have some smug fans? Yes, every team has them and I don't necessarily believe our entire fan base should be labeled as such.

[Sport]

Regardless of what they did the two seasons before that year, the 2006 Cardinals are the symbol of all the flaws in baseball's current playoff system. I don't care what happened to them during the regular season or how they got to 83 wins, the 11th best record in baseball has no business being in the playoffs. And it keeps coming up 7 years later because it's the shining example in the recent charmed life that is being a St Louis Cardinals fan.

If the 2005 82-80 Padres had pulled off a World Series win I would've said the same thing about it being a crime against the institution of the World Series. That team had the decency to lay down and die like they were supposed to.

[infrared41]

I've never cared about the two best teams playing in the championship round. Unless it's a flat out bad team like the 06 Cardinals I don't really care how their regular seasons went.

It'll probably be good baseball, but when it's played by two teams I couldn't want to lose more then I have no interest in watching it.

If I have to pick one, I want Johnny Gomes and David Ross to get rings so Red Sox I guess.

Fair enough, but you know there are people around here who will react exactly as I described it. It just how it works in this joint.

EDIT: The post above would seem to indicate that you care at least a little bit.

[rams80]

Honestly, that 2006 team didn't bother me much because it felt like a continuation of the 2004/2005 teams.

It pretty much was, albeit slightly weaker. Which is why there was a strong WTF?! reaction to that team's success among Cardinals fans. That one won where 2004 and 2005 didn't.

[worcat]

Regardless of what they did the two seasons before that year, the 2006 Cardinals are the symbol of all the flaws in baseball's current playoff system. I don't care what happened to them during the regular season or how they got to 83 wins, the 11th best record in baseball has no business being in the playoffs. And it keeps coming up 7 years later because it's the shining example in the recent charmed life that is being a St Louis Cardinals fan.

If the 2005 82-80 Padres had pulled off a World Series win I would've said the same thing about it being a crime against the institution of the World Series. That team had the decency to lay down and die like they were supposed to.

This is what is special about the playoffs! What other solution do you have?

No playoffs and the regular season team with the best record wins it all?

Every team makes the post season in some sort of playoff bracket?

This goes for all leagues across the board. Should the top teams make the playoffs with disregard to representation to their division? IE 4 teams from the AL East or 2 from the NL Central if that was the case? Sort of shutting out alot of the MLB's fan base in that case right?

[The_Admiral]

Do we have some smug fans? Yes, every team has them and I don't necessarily believe our entire fan base should be labeled as such.

Correct, nor should they be labeled as being somehow purer than everyone else. I mean, look. I know St. Louis. There's nothing pure about it. It's a medium-sized midwestern city. Big deal. It's Cincinnati with a giant croquet wicket. It's inhabited by the same mayonnaise-flecked-sweatshirt-wearing German-Irish lunks as the rest of our whole swath of the country. Do a cap switcheroo on your average Cardinals/Cubs/Brewers/Twins/Reds fans and you'd never tell the difference.

[worcat]

Do we have some smug fans? Yes, every team has them and I don't necessarily believe our entire fan base should be labeled as such.

Correct, nor should they be labeled as being somehow purer than everyone else. I mean, look. I know St. Louis. There's nothing pure about it. It's a medium-sized midwestern city. Big deal. It's Cincinnati with a giant croquet wicket. It's inhabited by the same mayonnaise-flecked-sweatshirt-wearing German-Irish lunks as the rest of our whole swath of the country. Do a cap switcheroo on your average Cardinals/Cubs/Brewers/Twins/Reds fans and you'd never tell the difference.

So what does appearance have to do with fan bases? Dont want to get off on a rant, but now we have stereotypes of areas in the country at play - not sure we need to venture off to that discussion or that it's necessary, just not sure where you're going with this

[Epiphanic]

It's a shame that the teams involved in the World Series are such a turn-off for people. From a pure baseball perspective, this match-up is a really good one. Based on their regular season records, this World Series will have the two best teams in the game facing off for all the marbles. Isn't that how it's supposed to work out?

This. From a pure baseball perspective, this is an excellent matchup.

But from a "fandom" perspective, this get much murkier. Today, Grant Brisbee wrote an article titled, "The Cardinals are the New Yankees". That article (and the ensuing discussion) really crystallized for me what "Cardinals-hating" is and where it comes from. From an organizational perspective, it's virtually impossible to hate the Cardinals. They have an upper-middle class payroll which they use to develop homegrown talent and augment it with some good free agents. Nothing really special about the organization or the team. The hatred comes from the fanbase. Cardinals fans are no better or worse than fans of any other team. The difference is that Cardinals fans have the image and reputation (deserved or not) of being indignant and having to defend every perceived slight against their team (real or imagined) with such shock and amazement that they're disliked is what makes them "hate-able".

That's how it is for me at least. Not all Cardinals fans are like this, but many of them are and the BFIB thing isn't helping their cause.

[Kramerica Industries]

Regardless of what they did the two seasons before that year, the 2006 Cardinals are the symbol of all the flaws in baseball's current playoff system. I don't care what happened to them during the regular season or how they got to 83 wins, the 11th best record in baseball has no business being in the playoffs. And it keeps coming up 7 years later because it's the shining example in the recent charmed life that is being a St Louis Cardinals fan.

If the 2005 82-80 Padres had pulled off a World Series win I would've said the same thing about it being a crime against the institution of the World Series. That team had the decency to lay down and die like they were supposed to.

I pretty much agree with this, and its exacerbated in the NHL and NBA too, for that matter (although the NBA's top-heaviness cleans up this problem). Kind of that way in the NFL as well.

Personally, I think the old pre-1969 system is a bit too limited, and the post-1994 system is a bit too wide open, even more now with the Wild Card game. Personally, if you're looking for a compelling postseason that features the best teams and has several degrees of intrigue, then the 1969-1993 set-up (modified so that the LCS rounds are all best-of-7; they weren't best-of-7 until, oh jeez, about 1987 or so) is probably the best way to go. It'll never happen, because too much revenue is lost, but with the current playoff system as is, we're seeing the flaw of "best team at the right time". I mean, gee whiz, good for you for getting hot at the right time and all that crap, but as it is, I tend to learn more about who the best team is when they have the best record after 162 games than what one team did over an isolated 11-19 game stretch filled with off-days that essentially eliminates the concept (or problem) of having depth on the bench, rotation, and bullpen.

To that end, which actually supports 'red's point to a T, this World Series is the perfect matchup representative to 2013 MLB. Of course, as much as I can try to be an objective baseball fan, there's still always a bit of the fan-me involved in all of this, and as such, I don't care much for the Cardinals at all for various reasons, and, well, the Red Sox are the frigging Red Sox, so screw them. If I had to choose a desirable result in this series, I would gladly take a 4-0 Cardinals pulverizing of the Red Sox. I will watch most of these games, I'm sure, but if I've learned one solitary thing about watching 2013 Red Sox games, it's that these games get genuinely bad for my health after a while, and that's because I have not been able to get a real "grip" on the Red Sox all season; at no point have a honestly believed their roster was as good as the results they were getting (furthermore, I thought most of their teams between about 1998-2011 were better than this one, some significantly so). I will never be glad to see the Red Sox win the World Series, but in years like 2007 when they had the roster to back it up, then it didn't irk me. 2013? I'll never, ever believe it.

What can I say? I'm stubborn. I've proven this several times over by now on this site.

--

Epiphanic posted this during my posting:

But from a "fandom" perspective, this get much murkier. Today, Grant Brisbee wrote an article titled, "The Cardinals are the New Yankees". That article (and the ensuing discussion) really crystallized for me what "Cardinals-hating" is and where it comes from. From an organizational perspective, it's virtually impossible to hate the Cardinals. They have an upper-middle class payroll which they use to develop homegrown talent and augment it with some good free agents. Nothing really special about the organization or the team. The hatred comes from the fanbase. Cardinals fans are no better or worse than fans of any other team. The difference is that Cardinals fans have the image and reputation (deserved or not) of being indignant and having to defend every perceived slight against their team (real or imagined) with such shock and amazement that they're disliked is what makes them "hate-able".

That's how it is for me at least. Not all Cardinals fans are like this, but many of them are and the BFIB thing isn't helping their cause.

Outstanding work right there. I think most, if not all, baseball fans are capable of looking at things from the "baseball first, fandom second" POV, but no one who has deeply rooted allegiances to ANY team can ever fully watch a game without some small part of their fandom coming into play. And the simple fact is is that the Red Sox and Cardinals, fair or not, have ascended up the ranks to being really only below the Yankees' level when it comes to derision from the rest of the league.

As I mentioned earlier, this is the first World Series since 1999 with the #1 seeds from both leagues. This is the first World Series since 1995 with the top two overall records in MLB facing off. They are two baseball towns, two ratings-drawers, and this is a great World Series matchup from an on-field POV and a TV POV. And most of those viewers who aren't Red Sox or Cardinals fans are probably masochists.

[Alex Houston]

I don't think I've ever heard this much conversation over the value of a Midwestern city on the Mississippi River. Hell, I doubt even the peopel in St. Louis care that much about their self worth.

[dfwabel]

If you are tired of the Cardinals, DO NOT read the latest column from Post-Dispatch columnist Bernie Miklasz

"What It Means To Be A Cardinal"

Excerpt:

“Cardinal Way” isn’t the name of a city street near Busch Stadium, but it does represent a path that the 2013 team followed from the beginning of spring training. It was their gateway to a division title, the postseason triumphs, and the ultimate destination — the World Series.
The Cardinal Way is an organizational model for success. Scouting players, drafting players, developing players and shaping their personalities to fit into a winning environment. But the Cardinal Way is also an attitude. And more than anything, it is about people, and the bond that forges professional and personal relationships.

Any baseball franchise can come up with a blueprint and standards for a universal approach. But unless each and every player is willing to sign on and buy in, it won’t work. The Cardinal Way is about trusting each other, working together, and always pulling in the same direction. It is about subjugating your ego in the pursuit of a more noble cause: fulfilling the goals of an entire organization.

I’ve covered professional sports since the late 1970s, and I’ve never seen a team like the 2013 Cardinals. I’ve never seen a team of players so close, so unselfish, so enthusiastic about reaching out. Veterans go out of their way to help ascending, younger teammates who are on track to take the veterans’ starting job — or at least a larger percentage of playing time.

“It is truly special,” general manager John Mozeliak said. “Perhaps even unique.”
Professional sports have a way of undoing the ties that bind a team. Players stress over their contracts, and they worry about enhancing their next deal. In that sense, teammates can become rivals. If one bumps you from the lineup, they’re costing you money. And that can lead to resentment, disharmony and clubhouse fissures.

The me-first attitude can be corrosive. And it simply does not exist among the 2013 Cardinals.

[STL FANATIC]

A better excerpt.

And that’s exactly what’s wrong with sports and our culture at large: The team that tries to do things the right way is somehow seen as abnormal. The team that plays hard but doesn’t try to embarrass opponents is portrayed as the bad guy.

[Still MIGHTY]

Vomit

[STL FANATIC]

So, I think we all agree every fan base has great fans and every fan base has idiots.

But let's stop it with the no fan base is "better or worse than fans of any other team."

That's simply not true. And there's no way for it to be true. Because all groups of people are not the same. Naturally, some fan bases are better than others. They just are.

How we should measure them, how specifically they're ranked—that stuff is all unclear and really not necessary to sort out. But the idea that overall Cardinals fan base isn't a damn good one, and better than many, is nothing more than a gag reflex to being told they're the absolute best.

Will Leitch gets it right here: http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/62822082/

[lordsketor]

Pitching Coach Bryan Price will be named manager of the Reds.

[Sport]

I'm okay with that. Smart guy, the pitchers love him.

The bigger problem is their hitting coach. This team has too many bad at-bats.