Just Joined First Post- My Best Winners Rom! :D

[obiwanobiwan]

OK, bad math on my part lol.

That DOES upset the balance 

I've tried to change things, but nothing's been satisfactory, the only option that comes close is just giving the '70s team to either the Reds or Pirates and just having the NL have one more than the AL, like in real life.

So the two options here, folks:

Set A:

1908 Cubs
1912 Red Sox
1927 Yankees
1934 Cardinals
1954 Giants
1965 Dodgers
1974 A's
1986 Mets
1991 Twins
2005 White Sox

OR

Set B:

1908 Cubs
1913 A's *new*
1927 Yankees
1934 Cardinals
1954 Giants
1965 Dodgers
1975 Reds/1979 Pirates *new*
1986 Mets
1991 Twins
2004 Red Sox *new*

So those are the two choices, tell me which you like best.

And three things:

1. I honestly don't think the Jays of the '90s were too much better than the '91 Twins, who played ugly but gritty, tough baseball, so the '91 Twins stay, sorry, couldn't work in an NL club here.........

2. Don't mix the sets, plese, just vote A or B

3. If you choose B, tell me whether you prefer the '75 Reds or '79 Pirates


Ah...... if only there were 12 teams instead of 10........

[Shooty]

1. I honestly don't think the Jays of the '90s were too much better than the '91 Twins,

Wrong.

So wrong.

So many great players to choose from, depending on the year you pick.  Joe Carter, Alomar, Olerud, Devo, Winfield, Henderson, Molitor, Tony Fernandez

[TβG]

i reject the notion that devon white was ever a "great player"

i vote B and for the 75 reds.

also, you should add a poll at this point.

[obiwanobiwan]

OK the poll is up and the question is out there: do the Reds, Pirates, Marlins, or Phillies replace the A's or
White Sox?

(If anyone is wondering why the Pirates get two teams up there, instead of, for instance, the 1975 and 1976 Reds, the '71 team, wtih Clemente and holdovers from the Pirate teams of the '60s, is different than the Stargell-led '79 team, whereas the '75 and '76 teams aren't nearly as different.)

Also, a second "informal" poll: A) 1991 Twins or B) 1993 Blue Jays?

I vote A; the '93 team, with Joe Carter's great walk-off HR was a good team, but I think Kirby Puckett and the
worst-to-first Twins are a bettere team and choice, and for all of Joe Carter's clutch, Kirby Puckett had a Fisk-like HR to win Game 6 and force a Game 7, I could go on, both teams are great- the 1991 Twins are my pick.

Yours?

And if anyone cares about how the 1965 Dodgers are playing (now that they're finished, waiting to see who to make for the '70s)......

They are STRANGE.

They are the STRANGEST team so far.

First, the pitching.  Sandy Koufax is great, as expected, but for some reason just CHOKES against "slap hitters" (guys who hit mostly singles and doubles over HRs.)  I'll play true rivalry game against the '54 Giants- and Sandy somehow gets Willie Mays to strikeout or ground weakly to the mound, but someone like Whitey Lockman, an average hitter, gives him headaches......... it's like the weaker the hitter, the more Sandy's likely to get rocked.  Drysdale's a great hard-thrower, but gives up a bit too many HRs.  Really haven't had to use Podres or Olsteen that much, Sandy and Drysale usually go the length or go at least 7.

But it's the HITTING that leaves me scratching my head.

This is a team with virtually no power- and yet they'll at least twice a game turn a slow grounder to the left into a double, a triple if it gets through the infield.  They just have a THING; it's not even the ball-moving-slow-on-the-ground glitch: the ball just always seems to go where the defense isn't.

And yet their offense is STILL anemic as predicted, scores maybe 2-3 runs, 4 on a "big" day.

So vote in the new NL team in the poll, and whether you'd rather Puckett's '91 Twins or Carter's '93 Blue Jays.

[Attezz]

91 Twins any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[Shooty]

91 Twins any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

So 8 votes for the Twins.

[obiwanobiwan]

lol, count it as 1 

Someone actually voted for the Marlins?  Wow.........

[Attezz]

My vote for the Marlins was really just a vote against the White Sox.

[nomaaa]

79 pirates

[BDawk]

phillies

[obiwanobiwan]

^

You vote in the poll for that. 

So at 10:00 PT I'll take the results of the polls.

So far, you see the poll above. 

And so far it's 2 votes to 0 to keep the '91 Twins over the '93 Blue Jays.

[ultimate7]

BlueJays

[obiwanobiwan]

2-1 Twins

And the NL race is getting tigheter.........

[obiwanobiwan]

OK, so 10:00pm my time came and went, and we had a tie between the '75 Reds and the '79 Pirates.

So, 'til 5:00pm PT, we're having a runoff election.

So go ahead and cast your vote (those two are the ONLY choices left) and if you've already voted, go a head and vote ONCE more.

In other news, the '91 Twins beat out the '93 Blue Jays and will retain their spot and will be made.

So let's go. 

[Shooty]

1. I honestly don't think the Jays of the '90s were too much better than the '91 Twins,

Wrong.

So wrong.

So many great players to choose from, depending on the year you pick.  Joe Carter, Alomar, Olerud, Devo, Winfield, Henderson, Molitor, Tony Fernandez

How was this post not counted as a vote for the Blue Jays??

I demand a recount.

[obiwanobiwan]

1. I honestly don't think the Jays of the '90s were too much better than the '91 Twins,

Wrong.

So wrong.

So many great players to choose from, depending on the year you pick.  Joe Carter, Alomar, Olerud, Devo, Winfield, Henderson, Molitor, Tony Fernandez

How was this post not counted as a vote for the Blue Jays??

I demand a recount.

Because it wasn't during the voting- that post CAUSED me to open a Twins-Blue Jays vote, it was BEFORE the voting, should've voted........

(And anyway, there was pretty much lukewarm support for both, a 2-1 vote, so that's just not enough to change it for me; the other one, the main poll had good support.)

[obiwanobiwan]

And the 1975 Reds win it by a 4-2 margin over the 1979 Pirates.

So the final lineup of Best WS Winners by Decade is:

1908 Cubs- done
1913 A's- done
1927 Yankees- done
1934 Cardinals- done
1954 Giants- done
1965 Dodgers- done
1975 Reds
1986 Mets
1991 Twins
2004 Red Sox

So tomorrow, I'm getting started on the 1975 Reds........ The Big Red Machine........

And now, how the 1913 A's play:

I'll go more into detail, but three words can sum up the 1913 A's: inconsistent and frustrating.

I said earlier that the 1934 Cardinals were extremely talented, but never could seem to get all their talents to work in a game.

The A's are worse- they're talented, but can't seem to get their talents to work well pitch by pitch.

EVERY at bat, you have no idea who's going to have it or not have it; Eddie Collins may have hit 3 weak grounders on the day, but then he'll hit a triple.  Eddie Plank will strike the side one inning, then give up three straight homers on three different styles of pitches to start the next inning.  Someone once even turned an unassisted double play on a diving catch and qucik throw- and the next inning let an infield fly hit him in the head.

To make matters worse, this isn't a team that can really afford to play like that.  The '34 Cardinals do, but have such great players (Pepper Martin, Dizzy Dean, Joe Medwick, etc.) that even when SOME don't play well, enough do so that they have a shot at winning (and they don't go hot and cold DURING the game on a regular basis.)

The A's, however, have great players, but just not "good enough" Hall of Famers.  This is the team that has
"The $100,000 Infield" featuring Hall of Famers Eddie Collins, Snuffy McInnis, and Home Run Baker (who has yet to hit a HR in a game, none of the A's have yet.)  I played three games- agaisnt the super-defense of the 1908 Cubs, the super-offense of the 1954 Giants, and the streaky-yet-still-strong 1934 Cardinals. 

The A's pitching couldn't take advantage of the Cubs' at the most average attack (power-wise, anyway.)
The A's hitting only managed about 3 hits and were picked off the bases against the Giants' mediocre pitching.
And in a battle of streaky teams, the A's committed 2 errors and gave up a 7 run inning to the streaky Cardinals.

What's annoying is that I can't call them the "weakest" team; on paper, they're not, not by a long shot.  The AL only has 4 teams, though; it's anyone's guess  how they'll do against the 1991 Twins or 2004 Red Sox, but for certain this is a team that can't master ONE facet of baseball, let alone three- the 1927 Yankees might skunk this team 10-0 in one inning.

Comments?  (And coming soon- The Bing Red Machine proudly presents the 1975 Model.  )

[Stock]

57 braves.
c'mon, give milwaukee a chance.

[obiwanobiwan]

Sorry- but the '50s belong to the Giants, because A) that '54 team was great and B) they didn't win after '54 and the '30s are taken by the Cardinals, so they need the '50s or they can't play.

And as great as Hank Aaron is, Willie Mays............ debate it anyway you want, but still- you need that Dodgers-Giants-Yankees-Mets four way rivaly going.

And guys- the poll's done, how do I close it?

Like I said before, the 1975 Reds won, and here's their scouting report:

The offense- incredible, truly a Machine.  There's really not a weak spot in the lineup, and the 1st 6 hitters (Rose, Perez, Morgan, Bench, Griffey, and Foster) are astounding, almost always good for at least 1-2 hits and usually at least a run per inning if you can get through that part of the lineup.

This IS the National League answer to the 1927 Yankee's "Murderer's Row" of Combs, Koenig, Ruth, Gehrig, Muesel, and Lazerri.

And the great thing about the Reds' offense is it's a fully 3-dimensional offense: not just an extra-base hit machine like the Giants or slap hitters like the Dodgers or speedsters like the Cardinals.  The Reds have all three, and probably the best offense in the NL, maybe second best only to the Yankees.

But the PITCHING AND DEFENSE IS ALMOST NIGHTMARISH.

Just as you'll be astounded how great the offense is, when you finally get your third out and it's time for you to pitch, the other team just starts teeing off.  And just like the offense is great for many reasons, the defense and pitching scare me to death when playing as the Reds.

First- Jack Billingham.

He's the only lefty in the rotation, and the "Ace."  On a good day, he's  decent pitcher who can be very effective and pile up the K's if he catches on fire, especially early.

But most of the time he's either at half-strength it seems, or just out of gas.  Pitches that have a sharp break or some extra speed look like softballs on a bad day for Billingham.

It's a 50-50 shot with him, so it doesn't happen ALL the time- but when it does, it is BAD.

The rest of the staff isn't bad, but you'll fidn that the whole pitching staff either gets a lot of grounders and K'a or a lot of doubles and HRs.

The defense is just ODD- they do the "usual" bad D things like occasionally drop balls, but you'll find they also have a knack for losing the bam-bam plays; this team has yet to turn a double play, and some easy fly balls have either bounced off their heads or just been misplayed and bounced over them.

All in all, the Reds are a good team; defensive woes aside, the offense is so great the usually the pitching will hold enough to give the Reds a win- often a somehwat ugly win, but a win.

The 1986 Mets are up; if I were to guess, they'll probably play like a flip version of these '75 Reds (great pitching and speed, streaky and not-always-reliable offense outside of Strawberry and maybe Carter and Hernandez.)

An early look at the NL, with all the NL teams almost done:

The Cubs, sadly, don't look to be a team that can break the The Billy Goat Curse; a decent staff and speed, but such anemic hitting that decent ptiching and good speed won't be enough.

The Cardinals are a good team, but don't show their full potetial often enough, and in this division, you NEED to have your A-game just about all the time to have any chance.

The Giants have a great offense at the plate, but are just too slow outside Willie Mays, and the pitching is probably the weakest in the division.

So it comes down to the Dodgers and Reds (will play with the original NLCS/ALCS format, so two teams in each division advance to the LCS) unless the Mets, whom I predict to finish about middle of the pack right alongside the Giants, catch fire suddenly or the Cardinals put it all together and stay consistent.

1986 Mets a-coming.

Thoughts?

[BDawk]

The 2008 Phillies would make a great video game team. So, go fuck yourself