What does it mean to you when a team wins the World Series?

[tducey]

I'm happy for the fanbase. Got 2 teams who haven't won in yrs. playing for the World Series this year so reason to be extra happy.

 

[CowboyB]

They're the undisputed 2006 champions. No doubt about that.

Exactly. And it's not like they had a shitty roster or anything. They just had a lot of injuries during the season and of course LaRussa's reluctance to take Izzy's lying ass out of the closer spot.

Izzy blew 10 saves that year.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

That healthy word matters a lot. Everyone points out the Cardinals underdogs but the Cards have also had really good regular season teams crash and burn like everyone else.

Of course health matters. Say the Cubs' entire starting rotation comes down with Ebola tonight - it'd be unlikely that they'd win the World Series, so does what happens over four games in October negate 162 games of results? Of course not.

Look at the 2004 Cardinals. You could make a strong case that they were the best team in the majors, but it didn't pan out. Ironically, two years later, they were probably the worst team to ever win a World Series.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Exactly. And it's not like they had a shitty roster or anything. They just had a lot of injuries during the season and of course LaRussa's reluctance to take Izzy's lying ass out of the closer spot.

Don't forget the benefit of playing in a complete shit show of a division. Overlooking that would be a major fuck up.

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

Change the LDS to seven game series, and then you'd have almost an air tight case for claiming the champion is the best.

Eh, i'm not sure...in your heart of hearts, do you REALLY believe the Mets were a better team than the Cubs last fall?

Even I don't believe that.

An inferior team could still beat a better one in a 7-game LDS, same as in a 7-game LCS

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Izzy blew 10 saves that year.

So, you mean to tell me that one of the shitty players on the 2006 Cardinals was in part responsible for them not being a great team? That's fascinating. Tell me more.

They had the worst SoS in baseball and still had the fewest wins of the eight playoff teams.

They were in a shitty division so they were able to eek out a trip to the dance, got healthy/hot at the perfect time, smoked through eleven wins and became the champs. It's an awesome story, and I love it because of what happened to them in '04, but to think they were the best team of the 2006 MLB season is silly.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

in your heart of hearts, do you REALLY believe the Mets were a better team than the Cubs last fall?

Even I don't believe that.

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

But they were at least better than the Indians, so...tissue?

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

But they were at least better than the Indians, so...tissue?

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

There, They're

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

What I don't understand is why a fan of a team that won a championship would care if other people think they were the best team in baseball or not.

If the Indians somehow pull this off and someone tells me they weren't the best and they got lucky, I'd be like, "fine. now sniff my lucky, champion dick, buddy!"

Then I'd dance.

 

[CowboyB]

So, you mean to tell me that one of the shitty players on the 2006 Cardinals was in part responsible for them not being a great team? That's fascinating. Tell me more.

They had the worst SoS in baseball and still had the fewest wins of the eight playoff teams.

They were in a shitty division so they were able to eek out a trip to the dance, got healthy/hot at the perfect time, smoked through eleven wins and became the champs. It's an awesome story, and I love it because of what happened to them in '04, but to think they were the best team of the 2006 MLB season is silly.

Izzy was not shitty. He had an injury. He had one the best years of his career in 2005 the year prior.

Keep reaching...

 

[CowboyB]

What I don't understand is why a fan of a team that won a championship would care if other people think they were the best team in baseball or not.

If the Indians somehow pull this off and someone tells me they weren't the best and they got lucky, I'd be like, "fine. now sniff my lucky, champion dick, buddy!"

Then I'd dance.

It's one thing to tell me what I should and shouldn't care about but for you tell what I do or don't care about only makes you look like the dumbass from my perspective.

 

[CowboyB]

Don't forget the benefit of playing in a complete shit show of a division. Overlooking that would be a major fuck up.

That's hilarious coming from an Indians fan.

 

[SJ76]

I think it means that they won the world series..

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

Izzy was not shitty. He had an injury. He had one the best years of his career in 2005 the year prior.

Keep reaching...

"He cost the team 10 wins by himself. He was fuckin' awesome."

Ok.

 

[TeddyJackEddy]

The Champions are the champions, that's how I see it.
My Braves won more games than The Yankees over the years NY won 4 World Series, so what.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

That's hilarious coming from an Indians fan.

If you lack the capacity for abstract thought, I imagine that'd be funny as a mother fucker.

The AL Central is often a weak division, but sometimes is pretty good. Doesn't really have anything to do with the NL Central and it's relative strength in 2006.

In 2006, the NL central was a fucking dumpster fire, that's how the Cardinals won it with only 83 wins.

 

[SlinkyRedfoot]

It's one thing to tell me what I should and shouldn't care about but for you tell what I do or don't care about only makes you look like the dumbass from my perspective.

You were in the same reading class as Omar, huh?

lolz

 

[ElTexan]

Eh, i'm not sure...in your heart of hearts, do you REALLY believe the Mets were a better team than the Cubs last fall?

Even I don't believe that.

An inferior team could still beat a better one in a 7-game LDS, same as in a 7-game LCS

Of course COULD, just like a lesser team could win more games over a 162 team season.
But a seven game series is definitely long enough to prove one's self.