Rogers Declares Cardinals Team of the Decade

[ruby23]

<!--quoteo(post=68420:date=Nov 6 2009, 01:53 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 6 2009, 01:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=68355:date=Nov 5 2009, 10:25 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Nov 5 2009, 10:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=68354:date=Nov 5 2009, 10:17 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Nov 5 2009, 10:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->So did the Cubs.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly, that was my point.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So the Cubs, a team with VASTLY larger resources, a massively bigger population, and usually triple the payroll, playing in a weaker league, performed significantly worse than this A's team over the decade.

Why is that?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They were lucky enough to draft Hudson, Zito, and Mulder and keep them healthy. While the Cubs had Prior, Wood, Zambrano and ended up with a multitude of health problems. It's really that simple. They didn't win becuase of Moneyball, they didn't win because of Beane, they didn't win because they did anything different. They one because their pitching (which was basically equal to the Cubs) stayed healthy for their 6 or 7 year run, while the Cubs all got hurt. It. Is. That. Simple.

And both teams won as the same amount of playoff series in the decade. Yay.