+- Sons of Ivy (https://sonsofivy.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Chicago Cubs (https://sonsofivy.com/forum/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The Friendly Confines (https://sonsofivy.com/forum/forum-8.html)
+--- Thread: Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade (/thread-6139.html)
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - Kid - 11-03-2009
Presuming the Yankees close out the WS, I hate it, but there's no way they are not the team of the decade, by any measurable category:
2000-2009
9 Playoff Appearances - Rank: 1 (STL 2nd with 7)
8 Division Titles - Rank: 1 (ATL & STL 2nd with 6)
5 LCS Appearances - Rank: T1 (tied with STL)
4 WS Appearances - Rank: 1 (BOS, PHI, & STL 2nd with 2)
2 WS Titles (presuming 2009) - Rank: T1 (tied with BOS)
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - Butcher - 11-03-2009
<!--quoteo(post=68050:date=Nov 3 2009, 08:12 AM:name=Kid)-->QUOTE (Kid @ Nov 3 2009, 08:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Presuming the Yankees close out the WS, I hate it, but there's no way they are not the team of the decade, by any measurable category:
2000-2009
9 Playoff Appearances - Rank: 1 (STL 2nd with 7)
8 Division Titles - Rank: 1 (ATL & STL 2nd with 6)
5 LCS Appearances - Rank: T1 (tied with STL)
4 WS Appearances - Rank: 1 (BOS, PHI, & STL 2nd with 2)
2 WS Titles (presuming 2009) - Rank: T1 (tied with BOS)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not the one who made up "team of the decade," but doesn't Boston get some sort of intangible points for ending their drought? They're right up there in every other category, too.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - VanSlawAndCottoCheese - 11-03-2009
Whenever I feel glum, I turn to the <i>Fire Joe Morgan</i> archives for some good old fashioned Phil Rogers bashing.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - Kid - 11-03-2009
<!--quoteo(post=68051:date=Nov 3 2009, 09:15 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Nov 3 2009, 09:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=68050:date=Nov 3 2009, 08:12 AM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Nov 3 2009, 08:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Presuming the Yankees close out the WS, I hate it, but there's no way they are not the team of the decade, by any measurable category:
2000-2009
9 Playoff Appearances - Rank: 1 (STL 2nd with 7)
8 Division Titles - Rank: 1 (ATL & STL 2nd with 6)
5 LCS Appearances - Rank: T1 (tied with STL)
4 WS Appearances - Rank: 1 (BOS, PHI, & STL 2nd with 2)
2 WS Titles (presuming 2009) - Rank: T1 (tied with BOS)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not the one who made up "team of the decade," but doesn't Boston get some sort of intangible points for ending their drought? They're right up there in every other category, too.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They had the biggest WS title of the decade, but they're way behind the Yankees over the decade.
Playoff Appearances - 9 vs. 6
Division Titles - 8 vs. 1
LCS Appearances - 5 vs. 4
WS Appearances - 4 vs. 2
WS Titles - 2 vs. 2 (presuming 2009 for NYY)
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - Butcher - 11-03-2009
<!--quoteo(post=68068:date=Nov 3 2009, 10:47 AM:name=Kid)-->QUOTE (Kid @ Nov 3 2009, 10:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=68051:date=Nov 3 2009, 09:15 AM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Nov 3 2009, 09:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=68050:date=Nov 3 2009, 08:12 AM:name=Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kid @ Nov 3 2009, 08:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Presuming the Yankees close out the WS, I hate it, but there's no way they are not the team of the decade, by any measurable category:
2000-2009
9 Playoff Appearances - Rank: 1 (STL 2nd with 7)
8 Division Titles - Rank: 1 (ATL & STL 2nd with 6)
5 LCS Appearances - Rank: T1 (tied with STL)
4 WS Appearances - Rank: 1 (BOS, PHI, & STL 2nd with 2)
2 WS Titles (presuming 2009) - Rank: T1 (tied with BOS)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not the one who made up "team of the decade," but doesn't Boston get some sort of intangible points for ending their drought? They're right up there in every other category, too.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They had the biggest WS title of the decade, but they're way behind the Yankees over the decade.
Playoff Appearances - 9 vs. 6
Division Titles - 8 vs. 1
LCS Appearances - 5 vs. 4
WS Appearances - 4 vs. 2
WS Titles - 2 vs. 2 (presuming 2009 for NYY)
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, if we're strictly going by the numbers, then yes -- the Yankees have it locked up. I'm still taking the Red Sox, though.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - veryzer - 11-03-2009
the yankees are the team of the millenium.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - Butcher - 11-03-2009
<!--quoteo(post=68106:date=Nov 3 2009, 02:35 PM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 3 2009, 02:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->the yankees are the team of the millenium.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
True. Fuck them.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - rok - 11-03-2009
I think the Cubs are the team of the millennium. No other team accomplished what we have.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - kbwsb - 11-03-2009
As kid's stats prove, the Yanks have been the team of the oughts. However, if the Phils end up winning the WS, Boston fans will claim the prize.
I submit the Royals as the <i>worst</i> team of the decade. I believe they have the most losses, zero playoff appearances, and the worst future outlook. Other teams may be close, but none of them just gave the shockingly inept Drayton Lane a 4-year extension.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - BT - 11-03-2009
<!--quoteo(post=68112:date=Nov 3 2009, 03:42 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 3 2009, 03:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->As kid's stats prove, the Yanks have been the team of the oughts. However, if the Phils end up winning the WS, Boston fans will claim the prize.
I submit the Royals as the <i>worst</i> team of the decade. I believe they have the most losses, zero playoff appearances, and the worst future outlook. Other teams may be close, but none of them just gave the shockingly inept Drayton Lane a 4-year extension.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Pirates have to be close on some of these stats. Didn't the Royals have a winning season. Once?
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - ruby23 - 11-03-2009
<!--quoteo(post=68115:date=Nov 3 2009, 04:02 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Nov 3 2009, 04:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=68112:date=Nov 3 2009, 03:42 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 3 2009, 03:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->As kid's stats prove, the Yanks have been the team of the oughts. However, if the Phils end up winning the WS, Boston fans will claim the prize.
I submit the Royals as the <i>worst</i> team of the decade. I believe they have the most losses, zero playoff appearances, and the worst future outlook. Other teams may be close, but none of them just gave the shockingly inept Drayton Lane a 4-year extension.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Pirates have to be close on some of these stats. Didn't the Royals have a winning season. Once?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They almost made the playoffs with Sweeney about 5 years ago.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - ruby23 - 11-03-2009
2003, they won 83 games and lost the division in the last month of the season. The Pirates have been worse.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - 1060Ivy - 11-03-2009
So it appears that using the total number of wins/losses to choose the worst team in the decade, why not use the most wins during the regular season to select the best team of the decade?
A Red Sox fan informed me that the Yankees would win based on that criteria. I thought it would have been the Angels but I've been told otherwise.
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - Runnys - 11-04-2009
<!--quoteo(post=68125:date=Nov 3 2009, 05:49 PM:name=1060Ivy)-->QUOTE (1060Ivy @ Nov 3 2009, 05:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->So it appears that using the total number of wins/losses to choose the worst team in the decade, why not use the most wins during the regular season to select the best team of the decade?
A Red Sox fan informed me that the Yankees would win based on that criteria. I thought it would have been the Angels but I've been told otherwise.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would you think Angels over the Yankees? I am not going to look it up, but have the Yankees won less than 90 games in ANY season this decade?
Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade - Ace - 11-04-2009
<!--quoteo(post=68107:date=Nov 3 2009, 03:46 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Nov 3 2009, 03:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=68106:date=Nov 3 2009, 02:35 PM:name=veryzer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 3 2009, 02:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->the yankees are the team of the millenium.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
True. Fuck them.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You mean the team of the moneyenium.
Blam, snap, kapow!