Jump to content

Match the AL Team with the similar NL team...


NewMarketSean

Recommended Posts

Yankees/Cardinals - 2 most winningest teams in each league.

Red Sox/Cubs - lovable "losers", even with Boston's recent WS titles and the Cubs recent playoff appearances.

A's/Marlins - getting results from moneyball approach. Both own the Orioles.

O's/Nationals - it doesn't get any worse than these 2 franchises, ironically located 40 miles apart. Is it something in the water?

White Sox/Mets - second fiddle team in their city.

What are some others?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oakland getting it done with Moneyball approach?

2009 - .437 W-L % = 4th in a 4 team division

2008 - .466 W-L % = 3rd in a 4 team division

2007 - .469 W-L % = 3rd in a 4 team division

I'd love to seem them play in the AL EAst on a regular basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you can compare the Cubs and Sox any longer. The Sox have one of the, if not the, best run organization in ball right now and have since the beginning of the decade.

I also don't agree with the Nat's O's comarison because we at least have a ton of talent in the majors and minors. The only thing I think the 2 franchises have in common is MASN. Regardless of record.

If you want to match the O's up with an NL team then I would probably match them up with the Brewer's of 3 years ago. A team with a ton of talent that has yet developed. Even that isn't a great comparison but I don't think there are any in the NL.

Love the topic though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rangers/Expos-Nationals is a better fit: 77 combined MLB seasons, 0 World Series appearances. Both regrettably played for a time in D.C.;)

Mariners/Astros. Loads of HOF talent, periods of terrific regular season success, never could get quite over the top. The sooner both realize they're presently in for a lengthy rebuild, the better.

Taking their histories in sum, I'd say the O's and Braves are a decent comp, but in the short view, O's/Pirates is probably more accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Texas/Atlanta -- MiL development and broad scouting success

  • Tampa/Florida -- great amateur scouting in Rule 4 but little to no international focus; solid results at MiL and ML level

  • NY/NY -- neither has done particularly well adding/developing amateur talent and both have consistently spent a lot of money on flawed teams

  • Pittsburgh/Kansas City -- awful in recent history but both are committing to bringing talent into their system over past 1-2 years

  • Oakland/San Francisco -- inconsistent results but both seem to be focused on landing as much high-ceiling talent as possible from international and Rule 4 additions; mixed on-field results but good foundation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oakland getting it done with Moneyball approach?

2009 - .437 W-L % = 4th in a 4 team division

2008 - .466 W-L % = 3rd in a 4 team division

2007 - .469 W-L % = 3rd in a 4 team division

I'd love to seem them play in the AL EAst on a regular basis.

I'd say Twins and A's both compare well with the Marlins as far as trading top talent at their peak value to maximize their return.

How about Orioles/Giants: Tillman-Matusz/Bumgarner-Alderson, Wieters/Posey, both historically proud franchises marred by steroids allegations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oakland getting it done with Moneyball approach?

2009 - .437 W-L % = 4th in a 4 team division

2008 - .466 W-L % = 3rd in a 4 team division

2007 - .469 W-L % = 3rd in a 4 team division

I'd love to seem them play in the AL EAst on a regular basis.

Look beyond that. Early 00's Oakland with Giambi and Chavez at their peak, Tejada, Dye, and Damon. And a rotation with Zito, Hudson, and Mulder. Finished in first or second place from '99-'06, with 4 division titles and one wild card berth. I'd say it's worked pretty well for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...