Cool record or who cares?

[Hank Scorpio]

27 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Oh well damn…stupid Twitter lying to me.

..as it do!

[Frobby]

19 minutes ago, Spy Fox said:

Looking through the other teams' vs-opponent records, there are two more teams who have a chance to achieve it this year after Toronto and Baltimore. 

The Dodgers can do it if they win at least one game in upcoming series with the Mariners and Tigers. 

The Padres (despite the fact they are 9 games under .500) can do it if they win at least one game in upcoming series with the Athletics and White Sox. 

So, not that big a deal.  

[DrungoHazewood]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

 

Not only did the Blue Jays beat the Orioles to this, the record is not even true. From 1871-1875 the National Association was the only professional league, and most of those years most of those teams won a game against each other team. From 1876-1881 and again from 1892-1900 the National League was the only Major League game in town and almost all of those years almost every team beat every other team at least once.

So, at best, this record would have to be post-1900 and shared with the Blue Jays along with several other teams that will do this in the next few weeks.

Edited September 12, 2023 by DrungoHazewood

[Moose Milligan]

I love it when Drungo comes in off the top turnbuckle with some random, obscure fact from the National Association.  Almost as much as when he drops knowledge about the Federal League.

[DrungoHazewood]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I love it when Drungo comes in off the top turnbuckle with some random, obscure fact from the National Association.  Almost as much as when he drops knowledge about the Federal League.

In 1875 the Boston Red Stockings went 71-8. There were 13 total teams in the NA that year, but several like the Keokuk Westerns and the St. Louis Red Stockings dropped out or just didn't play a full schedule, probably because they were losing money. But the Bostons still beat all of them, including going 1-0 against both Keokuk and the St. Louis Red Stockings (not to be confused with the St. Louis Brown Stockings in the same league).

[jerios55]

Like the Unswept record, I don't think the 'achievement' itself is something to care about.

The O's this year haven't had long losing streaks or had teams own them.  As a fan I feel it, because generally I have a feeling they'll end most games with a victory.  When they do lose, I feel like it won't take long to bounce back.  I'm not sure I've ever felt that way as as O's fan.  So at face value, I agree who cares, but these factoids speak to how enjoyable this team has been to us fans.  

[Moshagge3]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

It is but I dont care.  lol 

Kind of like if the Os (correctly) sold the naming rights to OPACY..myself, as well as basically everyone else would still call it Camden Yards or Oriole Park.

 

Off-topic but I think this is why the Orioles organization hasn't yet found a sponsor to sell naming rights to. Every company realizes the branding impact would be less than with naming a newer stadium, but I'm sure JA wants money in line with what other teams have gotten.

[24fps]

6 hours ago, jabba72 said:

I believe its called X now. 

I call it eXtwitter and wish everybody else would too just to irritate Elon Musk who I think is a complete douchebag. 

[Malike]

3 minutes ago, 24fps said:

I call it eXtwitter and wish everybody else would too just to irritate Elon Musk who I think is a complete douchebag. 

You're trying to irritate this guy? Lol, good luck with that.

 

[Sanity Check]

Here's my spin on how we can frame the accomplishment and separate ourselves from the fact that the Blue Jays also did it, how about:

The Orioles are the first team to complete the feat at home, on a Monday night, against another team from a State that also begins with "M", and uses a bird logo.  

Isn't this what baseball does.....like the first player to ever be in zero steals, 5 triples club? 

 

Oh, and while I'm at it, I learned today that meaningless statistics were up 37% last year......and no, I don't have a link. 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Sanity Check

[Chavez Ravine]

7 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

It is but I dont care.  lol 

Kind of like if the Os (correctly) sold the naming rights to OPACY..myself, as well as basically everyone else would still call it Camden Yards or Oriole Park.

 

There is a Mexican place in my town called La Conga, well except it stopped calling itself that about 10 years ago. Everyone else still calls it La Conga.

Edited September 12, 2023 by Chavez Ravine

[Uli2001]

22 hours ago, Spy Fox said:

This was debunked, as the Blue Jays had already accomplished it this year. They completed the set Sep 1 with Colorado. 

Then who cares.

[Tony-OH]

23 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Not only did the Blue Jays beat the Orioles to this, the record is not even true. From 1871-1875 the National Association was the only professional league, and most of those years most of those teams won a game against each other team. From 1876-1881 and again from 1892-1900 the National League was the only Major League game in town and almost all of those years almost every team beat every other team at least once.

So, at best, this record would have to be post-1900 and shared with the Blue Jays along with several other teams that will do this in the next few weeks.

No records should be shared with pre 1900 baseball. I know you are our resident expert and I do love some aspects of that era, totally different game.

[DrungoHazewood]

21 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

No records should be shared with pre 1900 baseball. I know you are our resident expert and I do love some aspects of that era, totally different game.

No doubt, but official MLB records count everything from 1876 on in the NL, AL, AA, UA, PL, FL and now the Negro Leagues as "Major" and some sources add in the NA. Yea, I'm being a little nit-picky, but people say ever/never all the time when the official MLB records clearly contradict that.

A little like yesterday someone posted on Twitter that Smoky Joe Wood was one of just 13 pitchers to win 30 games in a season. Well, sure, if you start history in 1900. Which seems a little silly because, for example, Cy Young was basically the same pitcher from 1890-99 as he was from 1900-1911 but we're only going to count half his career as real? There were 159 pitcher-seasons with 30+ wins, but 21 of them after 1900.

I certainly keep in the back of my mind the idea that the game has changed over time and records are less relevant to today the further back you go. But baseball in 1912 had far more in common with baseball in 1895 than it does baseball in the 21st century.

[Frobby]

They used to refer to the period beginning in 1901 as the “modern era” of baseball, because that’s when the American Leegue claimed major league status.  I tend to think of that when I think of baseball records.   But I love it when @DrungoHazewoodreminds us of the colorful period before that.