PDA

View Full Version : Pirates: 20 straight years of losing seasons


downstairs
10-01-2012, 03:49 PM
Clinched it with loss 82 last night:

http://scores.espn.go.com/mlb/recap?gameId=320930123

Sad, considering how well they were doing early in the season.

aryzner
10-01-2012, 04:05 PM
They're pretty good in MLB 12: The Show, though. I play with them quite often online. :D:

chicagowhitesox1
10-01-2012, 04:25 PM
I don't know what to think of them anymore. They started out pretty strong last year too. It's kinda scary for Pittsburgh fans with the ownership they have. I don't know McCutchens contract but I seriously doubt he stays in Pittsburgh.

Huisj
10-01-2012, 04:36 PM
I don't know what to think of them anymore. They started out pretty strong last year too. It's kinda scary for Pittsburgh fans with the ownership they have. I don't know McCutchens contract but I seriously doubt he stays in Pittsburgh.

I think he signed a long deal with them actually that keeps him around there for a while past when he would have otherwise become a FA.

WhiteSox5187
10-01-2012, 04:44 PM
I think he signed a long deal with them actually that keeps him around there for a while past when he would have otherwise become a FA.

He signed a six year extension back in May I think and said that he signed it because he felt that Pittsburgh was close to building a winner and he wanted to be around when that happened. It is certainly a good sentiment and I HOPE it is true. I would love to see Pittsburgh starting dominating the NL Central.

doublem23
10-01-2012, 04:45 PM
I don't know what to think of them anymore. They started out pretty strong last year too. It's kinda scary for Pittsburgh fans with the ownership they have. I don't know McCutchens contract but I seriously doubt he stays in Pittsburgh.

Don't worry about them, I'm sure they will be able to draft and develop another 24 productive Major League players, because I have been told numerous times that all teams need to do to win is stink for a years, stock up on prospects (who never fail, of course!!!) and sit back and count the championships. Works. Every. Time.

DumpJerry
10-01-2012, 05:11 PM
Don't worry about them, I'm sure they will be able to draft and develop another 24 productive Major League players, because I have been told numerous times that all teams need to do to win is stink for a years, stock up on prospects (who never fail, of course!!!) and sit back and count the championships. Works. Every. Time.
You're correct. It just takes some teams years and others decades to make it happen, but eventually it does happen.

Did I say years and decades? I'm sorry, I also meant to also say "a century or two."

Hitmen77
10-01-2012, 05:18 PM
Too bad. I was hoping that they'd finally have a winning season this year.

chicagowhitesox1
10-01-2012, 05:28 PM
Honestly since the Pirates didn't make the playoffs, I was kinda hoping they would go 20 years under 500. I guess it's kinda mean to wish that upon another team but if they're not gonna make the playoffs they may as well keep the losing streak alive.

Golden Sox
10-01-2012, 06:45 PM
Although I like the Cell, I wish we played in a park like the Pirates have in the South Loop. I've been all over the country following the White Sox on the road and the park in Pittsburgh is my favorite baseball park.

chicagowhitesox1
10-01-2012, 06:50 PM
Although I like the Cell, I wish we played in a park like the Pirates have in the South Loop. I've been all over the country following the White Sox on the road and the park in Pittsburgh is my favorite baseball park.

Alot of people do say thats the best park in baseball. I guess they have a view of either the river or of downtown that is unmatched by any park. I've never been there but i've never heard a bad thing about the Pirates park.

LITTLE NELL
10-01-2012, 07:09 PM
Although I like the Cell, I wish we played in a park like the Pirates have in the South Loop. I've been all over the country following the White Sox on the road and the park in Pittsburgh is my favorite baseball park.

We could have had a park like Camden Yards and PNC Park but JR and Co. nixed it, instead we got 2 tiers of suites and a club level section that gave us the steepest upper deck in MLB. Comiskey II was just about the most sterile park ever built, operating rooms should be so sterile. At least JR saw the error of his ways and came up with a park that has a little more character but still no PNC Park.

As far as the Bucs go, I thought that this was the year that they would break that horrible streak.

DSpivack
10-01-2012, 07:11 PM
We could have had a park like Camden Yards and PNC Park but JR and Co. nixed it, instead we got 2 tiers of suites and a club level section that gave us the steepest upper deck in MLB. Comiskey II was just about the most sterile park ever built, operating rooms should be so sterile. At least JR saw the error of his ways and came up with a park that has a little more character but still no PNC Park.

At least in 1991 when the ballpark was opened. Now? It's likely no steeper than many of the new ballparks, especially those stadia with retractable roofs.

LITTLE NELL
10-01-2012, 07:44 PM
At least in 1991 when the ballpark was opened. Now? It's likely no steeper than many of the new ballparks, especially those stadia with retractable roofs.

I will bet that there are some higher but I will put USCF at the steepest or in the top 3 in MLB. The steepest stadium I have been in is the Forum in Tampa, my wife would not even stand for the anthem, she has a fear of heights and that 3rd deck is insanely steep.

DSpivack
10-01-2012, 07:52 PM
I will bet that there are some higher but I will put USCF at the steepest or in the top 3 in MLB. The steepest stadium I have been in is the Forum in Tampa, my wife would not even stand for the anthem, she has a fear of heights and that 3rd deck is insanely steep.

I think it's more psychology and perception than the actual pitch of the deck. Not having a roof until the 2003 renovation I think gave off the perception that it was much steeper than it actually is, as you look up when you're walking and see sky. I would doubt that the pitch is any steeper than the UDs in Seattle, Arizona, Milwaukee, Houston, Toronto, Miami or Oakland. I think a lot perception, besides the psychology involved in walking up the stairs in the UD, is based on the unfairly poor reputation and stereotyping of USCF in general among the local and national media.

thomas35forever
10-01-2012, 08:35 PM
At least they have a bright future.

Tragg
10-01-2012, 08:59 PM
Speaking of collapses...stunning, really.

ComiskeyBrewer
10-02-2012, 03:25 AM
Have to feel for the Pittsburgh fans. With a 2nd straight 2nd half collapse, will the fans come out next year, even if the team plays well in the 1st half of the year?

Also, McCutchen obviously has had a breakout year(his OPS is currently .123 points above his previous career high), but will this be the outlier in his career, or will this be the new norm?

34rancher
10-02-2012, 06:28 AM
We could have had a park like Camden Yards and PNC Park but JR and Co. nixed it, instead we got 2 tiers of suites and a club level section that gave us the steepest upper deck in MLB. Comiskey II was just about the most sterile park ever built, operating rooms should be so sterile. At least JR saw the error of his ways and came up with a park that has a little more character but still no PNC Park.

As far as the Bucs go, I thought that this was the year that they would break that horrible streak.

Sorry, but that is false. He upper deck was not the steepest at that time and in fact was not even in the top 10. At that time Kauffman was the steepest. And Yankee stadium (original) was too. It was the steepest in Chicago at that time so people complained. Now it's number three with soldier field and the UC steeper. That was a myth by the tribune.

Railsplitter
10-02-2012, 09:16 AM
Have to feel for the Pittsburgh fans. With a 2nd straight 2nd half collapse, will the fans come out next year, even if the team plays well in the 1st half of the year?


Agreed. That a team near the tope of standings near midseason can plunge below .500 is bad enogh, but to do it two years in a row is mind boggling.

SOXSINCE'70
10-02-2012, 11:43 AM
Too bad. I was hoping that they'd finally have a winning season this year.

Having a record of 82-80 makes this a plus.500 season for the Bucs.
It's not much,but it's something.

Yes,it is difficult for both Pirate fans AND White Sox fans to swallow.
But,up until the last few weeks,this was a season to remember.

How quickly it turned into one i'd like to forget.:(:

Hitmen77
10-02-2012, 12:15 PM
Having a record of 82-80 makes this a plus.500 season for the Bucs.
It's not much,but it's something.

Yes,it is difficult for both Pirate fans AND White Sox fans to swallow.
But,up until the last few weeks,this was a season to remember.

How quickly it turned into one i'd like to forget.:(:

I thought they clinched finishing below .500 with their 82nd loss? :scratch:

Hitmen77
10-02-2012, 12:18 PM
Agreed. That a team near the tope of standings near midseason can plunge below .500 is bad enogh, but to do it two years in a row is mind boggling.

:ozzie
...and I wasn't even involved in those 2nd half collapses!

downstairs
10-02-2012, 12:26 PM
Having a record of 82-80 makes this a plus.500 season for the Bucs.
It's not much,but it's something.

Yes,it is difficult for both Pirate fans AND White Sox fans to swallow.
But,up until the last few weeks,this was a season to remember.

How quickly it turned into one i'd like to forget.:(:

You mis-read my original post. Or maybe using the term "clinch" I made it confusing.

They lost their 82nd the night before I posted this. Meaning they "clinched" a losing season.

PatK
10-02-2012, 01:51 PM
We could have had a park like Camden Yards and PNC Park but JR and Co. nixed it, instead we got 2 tiers of suites and a club level section that gave us the steepest upper deck in MLB. Comiskey II was just about the most sterile park ever built, operating rooms should be so sterile. At least JR saw the error of his ways and came up with a park that has a little more character but still no PNC Park.

As far as the Bucs go, I thought that this was the year that they would break that horrible streak.

From what I remember, people wanted a state of the art "modern" facility. And that's what they got. The trend in stadium building at that time (not just MLB) was to have as modern of a looking place as possible.

It wasn't until Camden Yards opened that people realized that you could still have the look of an old school park with all of the modern amenities.

And then the crapping of New Comiskey began

WhiteSox5187
10-02-2012, 03:02 PM
From what I remember, people wanted a state of the art "modern" facility. And that's what they got. The trend in stadium building at that time (not just MLB) was to have as modern of a looking place as possible.

It wasn't until Camden Yards opened that people realized that you could still have the look of an old school park with all of the modern amenities.

And then the crapping of New Comiskey began

Which was one year after Comiskey opened. In Richard Roeper's book "Sox and the City" he quoted the Tribune's Architecture Critic who even said that as soon as Camden Yards opened up in 1992 New Comiskey would be considered obsolete.

PatK
10-02-2012, 03:52 PM
Which was one year after Comiskey opened. In Richard Roeper's book "Sox and the City" he quoted the Tribune's Architecture Critic who even said that as soon as Camden Yards opened up in 1992 New Comiskey would be considered obsolete.

I'm not disputing anything, it's just that when it first opened, i don't recall anyone saying anything about it being bland and sterile.

That didn't happen until the "retro" parks opened the next few seasons (Camden Yards and Jacob's Field)

SI1020
10-02-2012, 10:46 PM
I'm not disputing anything, it's just that when it first opened, i don't recall anyone saying anything about it being bland and sterile.

That didn't happen until the "retro" parks opened the next few seasons (Camden Yards and Jacob's Field) I can tell you that for years many fans complained about the sterility of the generic footbowl stadiums like those in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and St. Louis. Baseball was more than ready for the retro park and Sox management as usual blew it. It takes years from conception, to ground breaking to completion. The Orioles were ready and the Sox weren't.

LITTLE NELL
10-03-2012, 07:25 AM
From what I remthe art "modern" facility.ember, people wanted a state of And that's what they got. The trend in stadium building at that time (not just MLB) was to have as modern of a looking place as possible.

It wasn't until Camden Yards opened that people realized that you could still have the look of an old school park with all of the modern amenities.

And then the crapping of New Comiskey began

What people? I will bet that if you took a poll at the time that most Sox fans would have preferred some kind of renovation of old Comiskey instead of a new park. I'll never forget going to a game at the old park in early 1990 and the new park's shell was up on 35th street and I could not believe what I saw, the new park was twice as high as old Comiskey, I scratched my head thinking what is this place going to look like when its done.

Nellie_Fox
10-03-2012, 12:50 PM
[B][I]

What people? I will bet that if you took a poll at the time that most Sox fans would have preferred some kind of renovation of old Comiskey instead of a new park. I'll never forget going to a game at the old park in early 1990 and the new park's shell was up on 35th street and I could not believe what I saw, the new park was twice as high as old Comiskey, I scratched my head thinking what is this place going to look like when its done.It would have taken massive renovation. I remember being in seats where I had to sit scrunched in turned partly sideways because my knees wouldn't fit behind the seat in front of me, and I'm not freakishly tall, just 6'3", I remember being behind pillars that blocked my view of essential parts of the field. I remember being back under the upper deck far enough that my view of the scoreboard was blocked. The food areas were dark, damp, and smelly. Left field was a swamp after heavy rains.

They had no place to play during a renovation; it wasn't like New York, where Shea was publicly-owned and the Yankees didn't have to have the permission of the Mets to play there while Yankee Stadium was renovated. The Cubs said "no" to the Sox playing at Wrigley during any renovation. Should they have gone to Thillens Stadium? Soldier Field?

AZChiSoxFan
10-03-2012, 01:12 PM
We could have had a park like Camden Yards and PNC Park but JR and Co. nixed it, instead we got 2 tiers of suites and a club level section that gave us the steepest upper deck in MLB. Comiskey II was just about the most sterile park ever built, operating rooms should be so sterile. At least JR saw the error of his ways and came up with a park that has a little more character but still no PNC Park.

As far as the Bucs go, I thought that this was the year that they would break that horrible streak.

I'm glad you included the part I highlighted. Yes, when it opened, it left a lot to be desired. But since the renovations, it's a very nice park, IMO.

For the record, you haven't seen sterile until you've been to a game at Chase Field in Phx. I've been to 20 ballparks and that place set a whole new standard for sterile.

Golden Sox
10-03-2012, 01:18 PM
Former sportswriter /lifelong White Sox fan Bill Gleason told me that the Old Comiskey Park should of been rebuilt. He thought the White Sox could of played at Soldier Field as it was being rebuilt. Needless to say that didn't happen.

DSpivack
10-03-2012, 02:07 PM
Former sportswriter /lifelong White Sox fan Bill Gleason told me that the Old Comiskey Park should of been rebuilt. He thought the White Sox could of played at Soldier Field as it was being rebuilt. Needless to say that didn't happen.

That reminds me of Sam Smith's idea when the Soldier Field renovation talks were just talks. He wanted to wrap around the upper deck of Comiskey II and have the Bears move there, while sinking a baseball stadium into Soldier Field and having the columns be an icon on either side of the field, while also not having a new monstrosity dwarfing them on the outside. I always found that idea interesting, if impractical.

SI1020
10-03-2012, 02:16 PM
I'm glad you included the part I highlighted. Yes, when it opened, it left a lot to be desired. But since the renovations, it's a very nice park, IMO.

For the record, you haven't seen sterile until you've been to a game at Chase Field in Phx. I've been to 20 ballparks and that place set a whole new standard for sterile. Have you been to the Tropicana Dome?

SI1020
10-05-2012, 07:39 PM
Don't worry about them, I'm sure they will be able to draft and develop another 24 productive Major League players, because I have been told numerous times that all teams need to do to win is stink for a years, stock up on prospects (who never fail, of course!!!) and sit back and count the championships. Works. Every. Time.Talent wins games. Sometimes you buy that talent. Sometimes you trade for it and sometimes you even draft it and then develop it. To be successful over the long haul, you need a balanced approach.

Hendu
10-06-2012, 02:24 AM
I think it's more psychology and perception than the actual pitch of the deck. Not having a roof until the 2003 renovation I think gave off the perception that it was much steeper than it actually is, as you look up when you're walking and see sky. I would doubt that the pitch is any steeper than the UDs in Seattle, Arizona, Milwaukee, Houston, Toronto, Miami or Oakland. I think a lot perception, besides the psychology involved in walking up the stairs in the UD, is based on the unfairly poor reputation and stereotyping of USCF in general among the local and national media.

I think a lot of has to do with the couple stories of suites between the UD and the lower level. Most of the other newer stadiums I've been to, you don't feel as far removed from the lower deck because there's another regular deck in between. Also, the enclosed UD concourse at the Cell kinda sucks.

PatK is spot on. When New Comiskey was built, the Skydome was all the rage. It's what people wanted at the time. Who knew that style would become dated within a few years.

SI1020
10-06-2012, 10:57 AM
I think a lot of has to do with the couple stories of suites between the UD and the lower level. Most of the other newer stadiums I've been to, you don't feel as far removed from the lower deck because there's another regular deck in between. Also, the enclosed UD concourse at the Cell kinda sucks.

PatK is spot on. When New Comiskey was built, the Skydome was all the rage. It's what people wanted at the time. Who knew that style would become dated within a few years. Camden Yards opened in 1992 and was an instant hit. Many baseball fans complained for decades about the colorless sterile box stadiums many teams were playing in. Sorry, but I believe that once again the Reinsdorf braintrust blew it.

DSpivack
10-06-2012, 01:52 PM
I think a lot of has to do with the couple stories of suites between the UD and the lower level. Most of the other newer stadiums I've been to, you don't feel as far removed from the lower deck because there's another regular deck in between. Also, the enclosed UD concourse at the Cell kinda sucks.

PatK is spot on. When New Comiskey was built, the Skydome was all the rage. It's what people wanted at the time. Who knew that style would become dated within a few years.

I'm pretty sure that Camden Yards has two levels of suites and a club level in between the lower and upper decks. Maybe the difference there is that the club level at USCF sticks out from the structure of the park, whereas at places like Camden Yards it's built in together; the suites are behind it recessed into the structure, as opposed to the other way around at USCF.

In terms of measuring height and pitch of the UD, I would doubt that USCF is any worse than any of the other new stadiums, especially the handful of stadiums with retractable roofs.

Lip Man 1
10-06-2012, 03:13 PM
In the book "Ballpark: The Building of Camden Yards..." the author specifically quotes a representative from the HOK company which built both Camden Yards and the new Comiskey Park as saying they offered the 'Camden Yards' style specifically to JR and he said no for what that's worth.

Why he did so, the author never stated and I suspect that is a real mystery.

Lip

DSpivack
10-06-2012, 03:20 PM
In the book "Ballpark: The Building of Camden Yards..." the author specifically quotes a representative from the HOK company which built both Camden Yards and the new Comiskey Park as saying they offered the 'Camden Yards' style specifically to JR and he said no for what that's worth.

Why he did so, the suthor never stated and I suspect that is a real mystery.

Lip

Was that style more expensive?

Lip Man 1
10-06-2012, 03:32 PM
Spivak:

That could be part of it although remember new Comiskey came in under budget (I always wondered where the money saved went? Back to the taxpayers??)

I suspect part of it was no one knew the Camden Yards look (retro) would take off and that JR wanted to have everything in house as far as shops, food options...he didn't want to allow the possibility of things springing up which could take away some of the income directly from the organization.

There's probably other reasons as well.

Lip