• Brave New World?

    Posted by on November 25th, 2005 · Comments (6)

    Do you know that, if Joe Torre leads the Yankees to a first place finish in 2006 and does not win the World Series, it would be an American League record for most years in a row (6) that a team finished 1st and did not win a World Series in that run?

    Right now, Torre is tied at five (2001-2005) with Mike Hargrove (who did it with the Indians (from 1995 through 1999).

    You do need some World Series “bad luck” to get a string like this – see the 2001 Yankees and the 1997 Indians.

    Of course, the National League record is a long way off: Bobby Cox, 10 years, with the Braves (1996-2005).

    It’s interesting that Cox, Hargrove and Torre are the only ones to do this for five years in a row and that it’s all post-1994. Clearly, it has something to do with the leagues going to the three division format (in 1995).

    Without the leagues being broken up into three groups, it’s debatable if the 1997 Indians, 2001 Braves and 2005 Yankees even finish in first.

    It will be interesting to see, if this does happen for New York in 2006, how it impacts Torre’s legacy. Will he be remembered as the man who won 4 rings in a 5 year span or the guy who finished 1st 6 years in a row and couldn’t get it done in the post-season? Or, do the two ends just offset each other and he’s then just another manager with mixed (meaning so-so) results in the post-season on his resume?

    Comments on Brave New World?

    1. MJ
      November 25th, 2005 | 11:04 am

      Weren’t the Chi-Sox in the old AL West before 1995? That would mean that we’d finish in 1st since the other former AL East teams all finished with worse records than us.

    2. November 25th, 2005 | 11:20 am

      But, there was no wildcard in the two set. So, then, there would have been a one-game play-in in the east to see who won.

    3. MJ
      November 25th, 2005 | 11:39 am

      You’re right. Wow, I can’t believe I’d forgotten that and it’s only been 10 yrs.

    4. Jen
      November 25th, 2005 | 6:12 pm

      But the schedules wouldn’t be the same. They wouldn’t be playing some teams 19 times. So you can’t figure that the W-L records would be the same.

    5. November 25th, 2005 | 8:42 pm

      That’s a fair point.

    6. Raf
      November 28th, 2005 | 10:40 am

      But the schedules wouldn’t be the same. They wouldn’t be playing some teams 19 times. So you can’t figure that the W-L records would be the same.
      ===========

      Yeah, that’s right; a combination of interleague play and the balanced/unbalanced schedule would’ve had some sort of effect.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.