Since tonight is (technically) the first day of the Playoffs, I thought I'd rank the ten teams participating in what is officially recognized as "the postseason" by how great a story they'd make if they won the World Series:
1. Cleveland Indians
A team that hasn't won the World Series since 1948, a city that hasn't seen a major sports championship since 1964, a franchise that had been losing for several years before striking gold with some free agent signings and bounceback seasons this year...just imagine how much it would mean to the fans in Cleveland if this was the year for them.
2. Pittsburgh Pirates
What a ride! Ever since Francisco Cabrera's pinch-hit single in Game 7 of the 1992 NLCS it had all been downhill. A record 20 consecutive losing seasons was finally snapped this year with 94 wins, and Pittsburgh is excited about baseball again. This team has had a great season thanks to several shrewd moves that paid off, and the organization has made its way back to respectability. If the Pirates could win their first World Series since 1979, that'd really be something.
3. Detroit Tigers
The Jim Leyland era has been one of restoration for the Tigers. Detroit has seen several great and very good players pass through since 2006, but it hasn't been able to win that elusive World Series title. After getting swept by a rerun Giants team last year, a championship this year could give this core of players redemption, and also solidify Leyland's Hall of Fame credentials.
4. Los Angeles Dodgers
Remember back in June when there was talk of Don Mattingly getting fired? Who would've thought back then that the Dodgers would end up running away with the division? With several veterans seeking out their first rings, and exciting youngsters like Yasiel Puig and Clayton Kershaw, plus the fact that L.A. hasn't won it since 1988, this could be a cool team to see win it.
5. Oakland Athletics
Billy Beane's boys continue to defy the odds. Oakland hasn't won the World Series since 1989, and while the current A's don't have many household names, they've got a nice little perpetually-overlooked team. I wouldn't mind seeing them get it.
6. Tampa Bay Rays
I love the Rays. The team with no financial resources to speak of manages to be competitive year after year while sharing a division with baseball's richest teams. While they haven't been able to assemble any outright powerhouses, they're always in the mix. I'd love to see these guys get a championship. The only reason I can't rank them higher is because they're the second Wild Card team, and it would feel wrong if such an illegitimate entry to the postseason was how they got their trophy.
7. Cincinnati Reds
Like the Rays, the Reds have to be ranked low due to entering the postseason in a playoff spot that shouldn't exist. Other that that though, Cincy has a cool core of players who I could back under normal circumstances.
8. Atlanta Braves
They aren't the consistently-great Bobby Cox teams of the 1990's, but they've built a solid nucleus of young players that have something to prove. The Braves won the first World Series I ever saw, back in 1995 when I became a fan, so I can't pull very hard for them, because I want to see someone new win it. Still, they're far, far preferable to either of the remaining two teams on this list.
9. Boston Red Sox
I guess it is a new era in Boston to some degree, since most of the 2007 team is gone. Still, I loathed few World Series winners as much as those 2007 Red Sox, and I still hate the city of Boston's sports teams with a passion. The last thing we need is another October-long Boston droolfest. Someone ought to do us a favor and eliminate these guys.
10. St. Louis Cardinals
There is nothing remotely likable about the St. Louis Cardinals. After the 2011 World Series, a small piece of me died, and I will never forgive them. This team deserves every bit of scorn you can muster.
Being the pessimist I am, in any matchup, I'll presume that the team with the higher number on this ranking is going to win. That means that the last team standing should be St. Louis, and they'll be avenging 2004 in the World Series. I would consider anything else a miracle.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
Monday, September 30, 2013
Oldest Ringless Players: 2013
It's time for the annual list of Oldest Ringless Players! Which combat-tested veteran will finally get his championship ring this year? I know the Playoffs technically haven't started yet, but since tonight's tiebreaker is taking place after Game #162, we can just throw in both participants for fun.
Even though I have a hard time considering this "Wild Card game" a true postseason game, I technically have to count it. The first time I did this list there were only eight teams, and now there are eleven. Come on, MLB. You're killing me.
As usual, I'm only counting players who were on their teams' 40-man rosters at season's end, though there might have been older players who played earlier in the season that are in line for a ring.
Atlanta Braves: Tim Hudson (July 14, 1975)
Boston Red Sox: John McDonald (September 24, 1974)
Cincinnati Reds: Corky Miller (March 18, 1976)
Cleveland Indians: Jason Giambi (January 8, 1971)
Detroit Tigers: Torii Hunter (July 18, 1975)
Los Angeles Dodgers: Michael Young (October 19, 1976)
Oakland Athletics: Bartolo Colon (May 24, 1973)
Pittsburgh Pirates: Kyle Farnsworth (April 14, 1976)
St. Louis Cardinals: Carlos Beltran (April 24, 1977)
Tampa Bay Rays: Jamey Wright (December 24, 1974)
Texas Rangers: Joe Nathan (November 22, 1974)
As you can see, the Cardinals have the youngest player on this list, and are also the most recent champions, so if the story of the 2013 season is going to have a happy ending, the Cardinals provide very little to advance that interest.
The Pirates have been exciting to follow all year, so if they end up one-and-done against the Reds, I will condemn the Wild Card game to my death.
After we have the results of the tiebreaker tonight, I'll probably chime in with my playoff predictions. As usual, I'll expect the worst and hope to be wrong. It's the only way I can deal with this game.
Even though I have a hard time considering this "Wild Card game" a true postseason game, I technically have to count it. The first time I did this list there were only eight teams, and now there are eleven. Come on, MLB. You're killing me.
As usual, I'm only counting players who were on their teams' 40-man rosters at season's end, though there might have been older players who played earlier in the season that are in line for a ring.
Atlanta Braves: Tim Hudson (July 14, 1975)
Boston Red Sox: John McDonald (September 24, 1974)
Cincinnati Reds: Corky Miller (March 18, 1976)
Cleveland Indians: Jason Giambi (January 8, 1971)
Detroit Tigers: Torii Hunter (July 18, 1975)
Los Angeles Dodgers: Michael Young (October 19, 1976)
Oakland Athletics: Bartolo Colon (May 24, 1973)
Pittsburgh Pirates: Kyle Farnsworth (April 14, 1976)
St. Louis Cardinals: Carlos Beltran (April 24, 1977)
Tampa Bay Rays: Jamey Wright (December 24, 1974)
Texas Rangers: Joe Nathan (November 22, 1974)
As you can see, the Cardinals have the youngest player on this list, and are also the most recent champions, so if the story of the 2013 season is going to have a happy ending, the Cardinals provide very little to advance that interest.
The Pirates have been exciting to follow all year, so if they end up one-and-done against the Reds, I will condemn the Wild Card game to my death.
After we have the results of the tiebreaker tonight, I'll probably chime in with my playoff predictions. As usual, I'll expect the worst and hope to be wrong. It's the only way I can deal with this game.
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Characterizing the Fanbases #9: San Francisco Giants
Welcome to the latest installment of Characterizing the Fanbases!
In this series I’m attempting to present
the psychology of every MLB fanbase. This series, as you would expect, comes
with a disclaimer: These characterizations are based on my own perceptions and
opinions, and no offense is intended by them. I freely admit that I’m only one
man, and my view is therefore limited. I’m fully aware that many fans will not
fit the profile I depict, and that’s to be expected, because it’s impossible to
make blanket statements about large groups of people. If you want to contest
anything I write here, feel free to leave a thoughtful, civil comment.
Otherwise, sit back and have fun reading. Perhaps I might even say something
insightful!
I’ve found Giant fans interesting for some time. I remember coming across the website EEEEEE! years ago, and the writing there really struck a chord with me, because the level of good-natured devotion the guys there had to their team always made for a fascinating read. They had all kinds of random memories about games they saw and players most people had long since forgotten, and it was one of the first things that made me ponder life through the eyes of another team’s fans. Who knows? Perhaps without Gregg Pearlman and his cohorts I wouldn’t be writing this blog post now.
So what are Giant fans like? For starters, I haven’t seen much in the way of negative traits, so forgive me if I seem to be inflating their reputation. They’ve always come across as fiercely loyal, yet friendly and intelligent. After waiting 52 years for a title they might be a bit pessimistic sometimes, but perhaps “cautiously optimistic” would be a better description. Before they won it I saw neither defeatist talk of curses nor an overflowing sense of destiny. They were always hopeful without going overboard.
The internet reactions to the 2010 World Series title reminded me of what was good about baseball. Unlike the entitled bully Cardinal fans from 2011, the Giant fans genuinely seemed to be grateful for what they were witnessing, and enjoyed every minute of the ride. If ever there were a group you could feel happy for in the end, it was them. It’s a shame such fanbases aren’t more frequently rewarded.
The only real hate they have is for the Dodgers. They still take games against L.A. more seriously than other games, but they don’t lower themselves to childish bashing as frequently as other teams’ fans do with their rivals. In fact, they seem to have a begrudging respect for the Dodgers, as the Giants have clearly been on the poorer side of the rivalry since both teams set up in California. For a long time the Dodgers seemed to have it all: a beautiful stadium, bigger stars, more national exposure, an iconic announcer, World Series titles, you name it. Now that the Giants have ditched windy, gelid Candlestick Park for charming, comfortable AT&T Park and have two World Series titles to their name, they have fewer reasons to be envious.
Their sense of humor is worth noting as well, as Giant fans strike me as a witty bunch. Whenever I read the comment section of a McCovey Chronicles post, I usually find myself laughing out loud at some point. They also come up with some gems for their sponsorship messages on Baseball-Reference, which make my statistical browsing a richer experience.
Based on what I’ve seen, I think the Giants have the type of fanbase I most wish I could be a part of. Their demeanor and camaraderie seem like a lot of fun. I’ve heard some talk in recent years about Giant fans becoming more obnoxious and self-important (a la Red Sox fans), but perhaps I’ve just been fortunate in that I haven’t seen it myself. Knowing what I do about human nature and the tendency to lose perspective, it’s possible that further titles will eventually destroy the archetypal Giant fan I found myself with an affinity for. However, the lover of humanity in me hopes that it’ll never change.
I’ve found Giant fans interesting for some time. I remember coming across the website EEEEEE! years ago, and the writing there really struck a chord with me, because the level of good-natured devotion the guys there had to their team always made for a fascinating read. They had all kinds of random memories about games they saw and players most people had long since forgotten, and it was one of the first things that made me ponder life through the eyes of another team’s fans. Who knows? Perhaps without Gregg Pearlman and his cohorts I wouldn’t be writing this blog post now.
So what are Giant fans like? For starters, I haven’t seen much in the way of negative traits, so forgive me if I seem to be inflating their reputation. They’ve always come across as fiercely loyal, yet friendly and intelligent. After waiting 52 years for a title they might be a bit pessimistic sometimes, but perhaps “cautiously optimistic” would be a better description. Before they won it I saw neither defeatist talk of curses nor an overflowing sense of destiny. They were always hopeful without going overboard.
The internet reactions to the 2010 World Series title reminded me of what was good about baseball. Unlike the entitled bully Cardinal fans from 2011, the Giant fans genuinely seemed to be grateful for what they were witnessing, and enjoyed every minute of the ride. If ever there were a group you could feel happy for in the end, it was them. It’s a shame such fanbases aren’t more frequently rewarded.
The only real hate they have is for the Dodgers. They still take games against L.A. more seriously than other games, but they don’t lower themselves to childish bashing as frequently as other teams’ fans do with their rivals. In fact, they seem to have a begrudging respect for the Dodgers, as the Giants have clearly been on the poorer side of the rivalry since both teams set up in California. For a long time the Dodgers seemed to have it all: a beautiful stadium, bigger stars, more national exposure, an iconic announcer, World Series titles, you name it. Now that the Giants have ditched windy, gelid Candlestick Park for charming, comfortable AT&T Park and have two World Series titles to their name, they have fewer reasons to be envious.
Their sense of humor is worth noting as well, as Giant fans strike me as a witty bunch. Whenever I read the comment section of a McCovey Chronicles post, I usually find myself laughing out loud at some point. They also come up with some gems for their sponsorship messages on Baseball-Reference, which make my statistical browsing a richer experience.
Based on what I’ve seen, I think the Giants have the type of fanbase I most wish I could be a part of. Their demeanor and camaraderie seem like a lot of fun. I’ve heard some talk in recent years about Giant fans becoming more obnoxious and self-important (a la Red Sox fans), but perhaps I’ve just been fortunate in that I haven’t seen it myself. Knowing what I do about human nature and the tendency to lose perspective, it’s possible that further titles will eventually destroy the archetypal Giant fan I found myself with an affinity for. However, the lover of humanity in me hopes that it’ll never change.
Sunday, August 25, 2013
Characterizing the Fanbases #8: New York Yankees
Welcome to the latest installment of Characterizing the Fanbases!
In this series I’m attempting to present
the psychology of every MLB fanbase. This series, as you would expect, comes
with a disclaimer: These characterizations are based on my own perceptions and
opinions, and no offense is intended by them. I freely admit that I’m only one
man, and my view is therefore limited. I’m fully aware that many fans will not
fit the profile I depict, and that’s to be expected, because it’s impossible to
make blanket statements about large groups of people. If you want to contest
anything I write here, feel free to leave a thoughtful, civil comment.
Otherwise, sit back and have fun reading. Perhaps I might even say something
insightful!
Are they the most famous (or infamous) fans in sports? Ask any baseball fan what Yankee fans are like and they’ll tell you: arrogant, loud-mouthed, entitled bullies. And really, why wouldn’t they be? After all, their team is the richest in the game, and they have the resources to buy any elite player they want. They have more than twice as many World Series titles as the next team on the list, and they haven’t been out of contention in the last 20 years. If you’re a bigger-is-better bandwagoner type who wants to follow the rings or a cocky New Yorker, the Yankees are the perfect team for you.
To say these fans lack perspective is an understatement. They literally believe the World Series should be theirs to lose every year, and they don’t seem to understand what a luxury it is for such expectations to be within the realm of possibility. When they don’t win the Series they feel cheated, as though a rightful victory were stolen from them.
“Yankee fan behavior” has become a widely-understood description of boorish, classless antics coupled with a sense of superiority. They can throw bottles, harass opposing fans, talk smack and boo as much as they want, but that doesn’t stop them from believing they belong on a higher plane than the rest of baseball fandom. They feel justified in criticizing all-time greats who join their team for not being “true Yankees” if they fail to live up to expectations, all the while elevating lesser players merely for being Yankee lifers. They’ll openly declare that it’s in the best interests of baseball for the Yankees always to be good, because the media enjoys covering their team and constantly perpetuates that idea. Hey, if the writers say it and it validates their wishes, who are they to argue? There’s no doubt in their minds that the Yankees represent everything good and right about baseball, and screw you if you don’t like it, you jealous hater.
While I’ve witnessed enough Yankee fan arrogance in my lifetime to make my blood boil, there’s a part of me that wonders if the Yankee fan isn’t somehow a pitiable creature. Sure, the average Yankee fan has witnessed more World Series titles than some franchises have in their century-plus history, but they still manage to find reasons to be unhappy. The fact is, human nature is never satisfied. If we didn’t constantly have the desire for more, the human race would stagnate. This trait can be the key to a man’s success, or it can be his downfall. Other fanbases realize they’ll never catch up to the Yankees and can therefore be appreciative of what they have, but Yankee fans have experienced higher heights than those other fans, so anything less seems a letdown. Undoubtedly it indicates that they’re spoiled, but once you’ve lived the life of a rich man you never want to walk in the shoes of a pauper.
While the Yankee trophy case is the envy of every other ballclub, it also carries with it the pressure to maintain a stratospheric standard. Because winning the World Series every year would be impossible, the Yankees and their fans are doomed to feel like underachievers in spite of their unmatched success. If the price of having an annually-contending team is the ability to enjoy the ride, perhaps those of us who aren’t Yankee fans should be thankful.
Are they the most famous (or infamous) fans in sports? Ask any baseball fan what Yankee fans are like and they’ll tell you: arrogant, loud-mouthed, entitled bullies. And really, why wouldn’t they be? After all, their team is the richest in the game, and they have the resources to buy any elite player they want. They have more than twice as many World Series titles as the next team on the list, and they haven’t been out of contention in the last 20 years. If you’re a bigger-is-better bandwagoner type who wants to follow the rings or a cocky New Yorker, the Yankees are the perfect team for you.
To say these fans lack perspective is an understatement. They literally believe the World Series should be theirs to lose every year, and they don’t seem to understand what a luxury it is for such expectations to be within the realm of possibility. When they don’t win the Series they feel cheated, as though a rightful victory were stolen from them.
“Yankee fan behavior” has become a widely-understood description of boorish, classless antics coupled with a sense of superiority. They can throw bottles, harass opposing fans, talk smack and boo as much as they want, but that doesn’t stop them from believing they belong on a higher plane than the rest of baseball fandom. They feel justified in criticizing all-time greats who join their team for not being “true Yankees” if they fail to live up to expectations, all the while elevating lesser players merely for being Yankee lifers. They’ll openly declare that it’s in the best interests of baseball for the Yankees always to be good, because the media enjoys covering their team and constantly perpetuates that idea. Hey, if the writers say it and it validates their wishes, who are they to argue? There’s no doubt in their minds that the Yankees represent everything good and right about baseball, and screw you if you don’t like it, you jealous hater.
While I’ve witnessed enough Yankee fan arrogance in my lifetime to make my blood boil, there’s a part of me that wonders if the Yankee fan isn’t somehow a pitiable creature. Sure, the average Yankee fan has witnessed more World Series titles than some franchises have in their century-plus history, but they still manage to find reasons to be unhappy. The fact is, human nature is never satisfied. If we didn’t constantly have the desire for more, the human race would stagnate. This trait can be the key to a man’s success, or it can be his downfall. Other fanbases realize they’ll never catch up to the Yankees and can therefore be appreciative of what they have, but Yankee fans have experienced higher heights than those other fans, so anything less seems a letdown. Undoubtedly it indicates that they’re spoiled, but once you’ve lived the life of a rich man you never want to walk in the shoes of a pauper.
While the Yankee trophy case is the envy of every other ballclub, it also carries with it the pressure to maintain a stratospheric standard. Because winning the World Series every year would be impossible, the Yankees and their fans are doomed to feel like underachievers in spite of their unmatched success. If the price of having an annually-contending team is the ability to enjoy the ride, perhaps those of us who aren’t Yankee fans should be thankful.
Monday, August 19, 2013
Characterizing the Fanbases #7: New York Mets
Welcome to the latest installment of Characterizing the Fanbases! Perhaps some of my long-time readers remember this series from last summer that kind of fell by the wayside! I was attempting to do each team in alphabetical order, but right now I'm a bit stumped on what to say about the Reds, which should've been the next team. Since there were a few teams for whom I already had my writeups done in advance, I figured I'd go ahead and post them now. Forget alphabetical order!
In this series I’m attempting to present the psychology of every MLB fanbase. This series, as you would expect, comes with a disclaimer: These characterizations are based on my own perceptions and opinions, and no offense is intended by them. I freely admit that I’m only one man, and my view is therefore limited. I’m fully aware that many fans will not fit the profile I depict, and that’s to be expected, because it’s impossible to make blanket statements about large groups of people. If you want to contest anything I write here, feel free to leave a thoughtful, civil comment. Otherwise, sit back and have fun reading. Perhaps I might even say something insightful!
I think to understand Met fans you have to examine their connection to the Brooklyn Dodgers. The Brooklyn Dodger Narrative (TM) has become part of baseball lore, despite some disputable elements. While entire books have been written on the subject, here's the simplified version:
Brooklyn was once an independent city before it was annexed by New York City in the late 19th Century. In opposition to the regal, wealthy, self-important image we associate with NYC, Brooklyn was quirky, working-class and diverse. For many years the Dodgers were a laughingstock, but they exemplified the grit and character of this now-borough connected to a larger metropolis it didn't necessarily feel a part of. Yes, Brooklyn was a true underdog, and when the Dodgers finally started winning in the late 1930's, it was nothing less than the Brooklynites deserved. When Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier for the Dodgers in 1947, it only confirmed the moral superiority of this franchise, essentially making them America's Team.
Of course, the Dodgers had a problem: they always came up short in the World Series. The big, bad, rich Yankees were usually the team to deny them, which was especially gut-wrenching, as it only underscored the cosmic unfairness of life that no good liberal should stand for. Unfortunately, such things were the cross every underdog must bear.
All that changed in 1955. Once again, the Dodgers met the Yankees in the Fall Classic and finally, after seven games and seven previous World Series losses, the Brooklyn Dodgers were at long last World Champions! How grand! How fitting! What a great moment not only for baseball, but all humanity! Since that oppressive unfairness inherent in life still existed though, it couldn't allow those loyal fans who lived and died with the team to enjoy it for long. Led by Walter O'Malley, the team's avaricious villain of an owner, the Dodgers moved west for the greener pastures of Los Angeles after the 1957 season, devastating a community and taking America's innocence with it.
Now, this narrative has some holes in it (too many to discuss, really), but it's more or less the story you get fed. Understandably, Dodger fans were heartbroken when their team moved, and even felt a sense of betrayal. After more than half a century they've never really let it go, despite getting a new team. Why? I can't say for sure. It's possibly due to their own obstinacy, but more likely it's because there's a big market for Brooklyn Dodger nostalgia. The Brooklyn Dodger Narrative (TM) is a poignant story that'll sell well, and due to the New York connection, it'll never hurt for media interest. Perhaps the fans have never let it go because writers, journalists and filmmakers constantly play up the importance of their team's place in baseball history, thereby leaving them with the impression that they were grievously wronged and owe it to the Dodgers' memory to hold a lifelong grudge.
All that said, how does it relate to the Mets? Well, after the Dodgers moved west with the Giants in '57, the National League had no team in New York for the next four seasons. It wasn't until the Mets were added as an expansion team in 1962 that the Senior Circuit returned to the Big Apple. The Mets attempted to create a fanbase from the old Giant and Dodger fans who didn't want to switch their allegiances to the Yankees, and for the most part, it seems that's what they did.
Since we can see that old Dodger fans are given to self-pity, and that many of them and their children (who probably grew up listening to their parents’ stories) make up the Mets' fanbase, what you have is a group that constantly feels unparalleled in its suffering. The Yankees are still the Yankees, and the Mets are stuck playing in their shadow, which only reinforces feelings that their team is underachieving.
If one looks at the evidence objectively, the Mets are probably MLB's most successful expansion franchise. They haven't won the World Series since 1986, but in baseball time, 27 years isn't very long. I mean, consider the fact that there are 30 MLB teams, and only half of them have won titles in the period since the Mets last won it, and you realize their championship drought is really nothing remarkable. Listening to them though, you'd think their plight was on par with the Cubs'.
Most teams go through lean periods, which aren’t fun once you’ve tasted the honey of success, as Met fans have at various times in the past. Having Brooklyn Dodger fans as their forebears, however, has instilled in them the mentality of an oppressed underdog, and they always feel as though their team is somehow screwing them over.
In this series I’m attempting to present the psychology of every MLB fanbase. This series, as you would expect, comes with a disclaimer: These characterizations are based on my own perceptions and opinions, and no offense is intended by them. I freely admit that I’m only one man, and my view is therefore limited. I’m fully aware that many fans will not fit the profile I depict, and that’s to be expected, because it’s impossible to make blanket statements about large groups of people. If you want to contest anything I write here, feel free to leave a thoughtful, civil comment. Otherwise, sit back and have fun reading. Perhaps I might even say something insightful!
I think to understand Met fans you have to examine their connection to the Brooklyn Dodgers. The Brooklyn Dodger Narrative (TM) has become part of baseball lore, despite some disputable elements. While entire books have been written on the subject, here's the simplified version:
Brooklyn was once an independent city before it was annexed by New York City in the late 19th Century. In opposition to the regal, wealthy, self-important image we associate with NYC, Brooklyn was quirky, working-class and diverse. For many years the Dodgers were a laughingstock, but they exemplified the grit and character of this now-borough connected to a larger metropolis it didn't necessarily feel a part of. Yes, Brooklyn was a true underdog, and when the Dodgers finally started winning in the late 1930's, it was nothing less than the Brooklynites deserved. When Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier for the Dodgers in 1947, it only confirmed the moral superiority of this franchise, essentially making them America's Team.
Of course, the Dodgers had a problem: they always came up short in the World Series. The big, bad, rich Yankees were usually the team to deny them, which was especially gut-wrenching, as it only underscored the cosmic unfairness of life that no good liberal should stand for. Unfortunately, such things were the cross every underdog must bear.
All that changed in 1955. Once again, the Dodgers met the Yankees in the Fall Classic and finally, after seven games and seven previous World Series losses, the Brooklyn Dodgers were at long last World Champions! How grand! How fitting! What a great moment not only for baseball, but all humanity! Since that oppressive unfairness inherent in life still existed though, it couldn't allow those loyal fans who lived and died with the team to enjoy it for long. Led by Walter O'Malley, the team's avaricious villain of an owner, the Dodgers moved west for the greener pastures of Los Angeles after the 1957 season, devastating a community and taking America's innocence with it.
Now, this narrative has some holes in it (too many to discuss, really), but it's more or less the story you get fed. Understandably, Dodger fans were heartbroken when their team moved, and even felt a sense of betrayal. After more than half a century they've never really let it go, despite getting a new team. Why? I can't say for sure. It's possibly due to their own obstinacy, but more likely it's because there's a big market for Brooklyn Dodger nostalgia. The Brooklyn Dodger Narrative (TM) is a poignant story that'll sell well, and due to the New York connection, it'll never hurt for media interest. Perhaps the fans have never let it go because writers, journalists and filmmakers constantly play up the importance of their team's place in baseball history, thereby leaving them with the impression that they were grievously wronged and owe it to the Dodgers' memory to hold a lifelong grudge.
All that said, how does it relate to the Mets? Well, after the Dodgers moved west with the Giants in '57, the National League had no team in New York for the next four seasons. It wasn't until the Mets were added as an expansion team in 1962 that the Senior Circuit returned to the Big Apple. The Mets attempted to create a fanbase from the old Giant and Dodger fans who didn't want to switch their allegiances to the Yankees, and for the most part, it seems that's what they did.
Since we can see that old Dodger fans are given to self-pity, and that many of them and their children (who probably grew up listening to their parents’ stories) make up the Mets' fanbase, what you have is a group that constantly feels unparalleled in its suffering. The Yankees are still the Yankees, and the Mets are stuck playing in their shadow, which only reinforces feelings that their team is underachieving.
If one looks at the evidence objectively, the Mets are probably MLB's most successful expansion franchise. They haven't won the World Series since 1986, but in baseball time, 27 years isn't very long. I mean, consider the fact that there are 30 MLB teams, and only half of them have won titles in the period since the Mets last won it, and you realize their championship drought is really nothing remarkable. Listening to them though, you'd think their plight was on par with the Cubs'.
Most teams go through lean periods, which aren’t fun once you’ve tasted the honey of success, as Met fans have at various times in the past. Having Brooklyn Dodger fans as their forebears, however, has instilled in them the mentality of an oppressed underdog, and they always feel as though their team is somehow screwing them over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)