MrCrowesGarden wrote:9 teams have a longer active postseason drought than the Cardinals, and most of them have been tanking.
Based on this criteria, you'd prefer that the Cardinals operate more like the Baltimore Orioles.
MrCrowesGarden wrote:9 teams have a longer active postseason drought than the Cardinals, and most of them have been tanking.
Big Amoco Sign wrote:Well there's 7 teams with more wins than the Cardinals and the Mets are right behind them. And the Mets have been to the WS (the argument some could make pertaining to success). That's the criteria: wins + WS appearanceSocnorb11 wrote:Which 7?Big Amoco Sign wrote:7 teams (out of a possible 30) isn't that short. And you could argue the Mets have been more successful making it 8.Socnorb11 wrote:
You want me to show you a list of the teams that have been more successful in the last half decade?
It's really short.
And that will rise after this season.
The Mets have had 2 winning seasons in the last 5 years. I have no idea what your criteria is here.
Could argue Royals too and make it 9.
Socnorb11 wrote:MrCrowesGarden wrote:9 teams have a longer active postseason drought than the Cardinals, and most of them have been tanking.
Based on this criteria, you'd prefer that the Cardinals operate more like the Baltimore Orioles.
Since the Mets are the only team he listed, I did a quick searchSocnorb11 wrote:Which 7?Big Amoco Sign wrote:7 teams (out of a possible 30) isn't that short. And you could argue the Mets have been more successful making it 8.Socnorb11 wrote:
You want me to show you a list of the teams that have been more successful in the last half decade?
It's really short.
And that will rise after this season.
The Mets have had 2 winning seasons in the last 5 years. I have no idea what your criteria is here.
If we’re going over the last half decade then it should be the DodgersMrCrowesGarden wrote:Socnorb11 wrote:MrCrowesGarden wrote:9 teams have a longer active postseason drought than the Cardinals, and most of them have been tanking.
Based on this criteria, you'd prefer that the Cardinals operate more like the Baltimore Orioles.
I'm saying maybe we can stop holding up the Cardinals as this bastion of success now.
MrCrowesGarden wrote:Socnorb11 wrote:MrCrowesGarden wrote:9 teams have a longer active postseason drought than the Cardinals, and most of them have been tanking.
Based on this criteria, you'd prefer that the Cardinals operate more like the Baltimore Orioles.
I'm saying maybe we can stop holding up the Cardinals as this bastion of success now.
You're misrepresenting me.Socnorb11 wrote:MrCrowesGarden wrote:Socnorb11 wrote:MrCrowesGarden wrote:9 teams have a longer active postseason drought than the Cardinals, and most of them have been tanking.
Based on this criteria, you'd prefer that the Cardinals operate more like the Baltimore Orioles.
I'm saying maybe we can stop holding up the Cardinals as this bastion of success now.
You should review the context of this conversation.
We're only playing this game because you guys wanted to present the organization as an epic failure (which isn't true), not because I was presenting them as the Reds of the 70's.
No.Big Amoco Sign wrote:Cardinals operation isn't that fun anymore. 88 wins and no playoffs is boring baseball. Tanking for a super team would almost get more interesting. For some at least. 88 wins and praying for variance isn't a successful model in this near era of WC2 teams.