Why St. Louis is the Ultimate Baseball Town
- Thread starter SoxJox
- Start date
In case you haven't heard them telling you again and again, Twitter proves that they have the Best Fans in Baseball.
Kind of like how "classy" Yankee fans were through the mid '90s - early 2000s.drleather2001 said:
Not to be all about us, but it is rather amazing that, in the context of the Patriots, the Cardinals get this kind of press and they get a total pass for a vastly more severe violation of fair play for which there is actual evidence!canderson said:
With all due respect to the Cards and their incredible on-field record - no 100-loss season since 1908, only three 90-loss seasons since then, 11 World Series, 18 pennants, more iconic stars than you can count - they've got an easier ride than just about any other team in baseball in terms of local competition.
Years without an NFL team, and the current one has one foot out the door. No NBA team. No major college program. Just the Blues. That's it.
Fuck, St. Louis is the spiritual home of US soccer so an MLS team might do pretty well there. But they contrive to not even have that - they just got a USL (third division) team in 2014.
So if you like sports for the 6 months out of the year when the Blues aren't in it, you basically have to watch the Cardinals.
Compare that to the Giants, who have basically rebuilt a baseball town from scratch in SF. Famously smart baseball organization eight miles away. Two NFL teams - OK, both in the toilet now, but both have substantial traditions of winning. The NBA champions. A persistent playoff contender hockey team. Cal and Stanford, plus some kinda interesting mid-major WCC programs. A decent MLS team too.
Years without an NFL team, and the current one has one foot out the door. No NBA team. No major college program. Just the Blues. That's it.
Fuck, St. Louis is the spiritual home of US soccer so an MLS team might do pretty well there. But they contrive to not even have that - they just got a USL (third division) team in 2014.
So if you like sports for the 6 months out of the year when the Blues aren't in it, you basically have to watch the Cardinals.
Compare that to the Giants, who have basically rebuilt a baseball town from scratch in SF. Famously smart baseball organization eight miles away. Two NFL teams - OK, both in the toilet now, but both have substantial traditions of winning. The NBA champions. A persistent playoff contender hockey team. Cal and Stanford, plus some kinda interesting mid-major WCC programs. A decent MLS team too.
Spacemans Bong said:
To be fair, up until the 1950s, they had the St. Louis Browns in the same city.
And the Royals are in the same state as well.
Spacemans Bong said:
Let's also not forget that for the first half (at least) of the franchise's existence, there was zero competition of any kind to their west and south. Easy to set down strong roots with a fanbase when you have generation after generation of people whose closest pro sports team of any kind within 500-1000 miles is you.
How can you not like the Cardinals?
- Treated WS winning Red Sox with great deference and respect
- Their roster is over 50% home grown players: 5 of their position players (Molina, Carpenter, Adams, Wong, Piscotty), 3 of their starters (Garcia, Wacha, Lynn), 8 of their bench/bullpen (Rosenthal, Siegrist, Maness, Lyons, Cruz, G. Garcia, Pham, Jay) - 16 out of 25 on their NLDS roster were drafted by the Cardinals
- Their opening day 25-man was $122M
- Their ball park plays fair
- Their 2015 playoff ratings in their hometown are not lower than the Blackhawks
But more importantly...
- Their use of "Surrender Towels" seems a bit muted (albeit I'll wager the Cubs don't wave those flags at all)
- They don't use "Thunder Dicks", "Cow Balls", or Foghorns
- By luck, they have the only broadcast team that you can listen to - including the best in the business: Eckersley (along with Simpson and Anderson) - albeit that's still just luck for the Cardinals / Cubs
- They're not referred to as the "Cardies"
- And, most critically - their manager is not the world's 2nd greatest genius (after Hawking)
- Treated WS winning Red Sox with great deference and respect
- Their roster is over 50% home grown players: 5 of their position players (Molina, Carpenter, Adams, Wong, Piscotty), 3 of their starters (Garcia, Wacha, Lynn), 8 of their bench/bullpen (Rosenthal, Siegrist, Maness, Lyons, Cruz, G. Garcia, Pham, Jay) - 16 out of 25 on their NLDS roster were drafted by the Cardinals
- Their opening day 25-man was $122M
- Their ball park plays fair
- Their 2015 playoff ratings in their hometown are not lower than the Blackhawks
But more importantly...
- Their use of "Surrender Towels" seems a bit muted (albeit I'll wager the Cubs don't wave those flags at all)
- They don't use "Thunder Dicks", "Cow Balls", or Foghorns
- By luck, they have the only broadcast team that you can listen to - including the best in the business: Eckersley (along with Simpson and Anderson) - albeit that's still just luck for the Cardinals / Cubs
- They're not referred to as the "Cardies"
- And, most critically - their manager is not the world's 2nd greatest genius (after Hawking)
geoduck no quahog said:
This.
I don't get all the hate for the Cardinals. They consistently do a great job of evaluating & developing players in their system & put together strong seasons year in & year out. I wish the Red Sox could be so consistent.
Yeah, I get tired of the media ballwashing & fans puffing out their chests about being "The Best Fans in Baseball" but that has nothing to do with the organization & what they have accomplished.
So far, the media seems to be giving them a pass on the FBI investigation but I expect the Feds to keep digging & if there are charges filed, we'll see more coverage.
I'm not rooting for them but I sure respect them.
This has been very eye-opening. I posted the story thinking it was an interesting read. Boy must I have been naive. Little did I know of the local venom running so strongly beneath the surface in these parts. Must be the ghosts of '46 and '67. I certainly am more in line with GNQ's sentiments, and most definitely MMM's bottom line. I'll be sure not to raise the subject of red birds again, so as to be sure not to offend.
Christ, nobody is hating the Cardinals franchise itself. Stop trying to take some high road that doesn't exist.
People are sick of the constant positive press that the Cardinals, and in particular their fans, get for things that have nothing to do with the game itself. This goes double in a calendar year where Cards fans were filmed being shockingly racist assholes in the wake of Ferguson and after their precious and saintly franchise was caught in a cheating scandal by the fucking FBI.
And it's not unique to the Cards. Bad franchises are all alike, but every hugely successful one is annoying in its own way.
People are sick of the constant positive press that the Cardinals, and in particular their fans, get for things that have nothing to do with the game itself. This goes double in a calendar year where Cards fans were filmed being shockingly racist assholes in the wake of Ferguson and after their precious and saintly franchise was caught in a cheating scandal by the fucking FBI.
And it's not unique to the Cards. Bad franchises are all alike, but every hugely successful one is annoying in its own way.
It wasn't apparent, but I made my last post somewhat in jest, except for the part about agreeing with GNQ and MMM. Oh well.
I have nothing against the Cardinals.
However, without weighing in on the general point, I thought it was amusing that the WSJ went with Peralta as an example of "love" improving his game. He did have a performance spike in 2014. The year after he got an enforced rest due to a PED suspension. 2015 - he's not so spectacular. Where's the love?
However, without weighing in on the general point, I thought it was amusing that the WSJ went with Peralta as an example of "love" improving his game. He did have a performance spike in 2014. The year after he got an enforced rest due to a PED suspension. 2015 - he's not so spectacular. Where's the love?
I don't think there is much venom. There is some -- but not much -- cultural bias that turns more on where you live than who you root for (truth be told, Sox fans more in common with Yankee fans, and Cards fans with Cubs fans, and any of these fans would care to admit). And there also is some natural jealousy (this is supposed to be OUR century, goddamit).SoxJox said:
Lifelong Sox fan, but I have no problem with the Cards or their fans. I am grateful to the latter for the classy way they handled their WS losses to us. Especially 2004.
As for the team, it is almost unfathomably well run. There is no disputing it. I don't know how you can do anything but admire their accomplishments.
Right.Lose Remerswaal said:
But I don't think it accounts for the record back to 1908 as described by Spaceman's Bong. Unless, of course, one believes that football deflation accounts for the record complied in Foxborough since 2000.
Their fanbase reminds me of the Colts fanbase.
The organization isn't anywhere near as odious, but I mostly dislike teams based on their fans. There might be specific players or managers/coaches I dislike. But in general it's the fanbase that dictates my biases.
The organization isn't anywhere near as odious, but I mostly dislike teams based on their fans. There might be specific players or managers/coaches I dislike. But in general it's the fanbase that dictates my biases.
They have been a well run team, sure.
The reason there is negative feedback now is that since 2004/5 all we fucking hear from everyone in the world is how it is the best team and best baseball fans ever. I mean, Boston went through this from around 1998-2007, and by then people got really sick of it, including most Bostonians (or at least most SoSHers). The St. Louis fans seem to eat that up, at least the displaced ones I know. The way this amped up for the 2013 World Series really rubbed me the wrong way. Even now if you watch game 1, it is like some affront to the world that the Cardinals made a couple of errors and we had to hear about "playing the game right" so damn much. Then there was my comment above, where we spent most of game 2 listening to the life story of Michael Wacha instead of the game, as if the Red Sox were just there to be an opponent for the Sainted Louis Cardinals.
Is that a reason to hate the Cardinals? No, but it is a reason to hate articles like these.
Also, Tony La Russa.
The reason there is negative feedback now is that since 2004/5 all we fucking hear from everyone in the world is how it is the best team and best baseball fans ever. I mean, Boston went through this from around 1998-2007, and by then people got really sick of it, including most Bostonians (or at least most SoSHers). The St. Louis fans seem to eat that up, at least the displaced ones I know. The way this amped up for the 2013 World Series really rubbed me the wrong way. Even now if you watch game 1, it is like some affront to the world that the Cardinals made a couple of errors and we had to hear about "playing the game right" so damn much. Then there was my comment above, where we spent most of game 2 listening to the life story of Michael Wacha instead of the game, as if the Red Sox were just there to be an opponent for the Sainted Louis Cardinals.
Is that a reason to hate the Cardinals? No, but it is a reason to hate articles like these.
Also, Tony La Russa.
I will say that I think that playing over 162 games does show a truer measure of a team's quality than a short series. In a playoff series you may only need 3 starters and 2 bullpen guys really. But over 162 games, you need a hell of a lot more than that.
But still....they don't give you a ring for winning your division. You gotta play baseball for the 162 game season AND the playoffs.
But still....they don't give you a ring for winning your division. You gotta play baseball for the 162 game season AND the playoffs.
It wouldn't be so obnoxious except for the 2006 83-win World Series Champion St. Louis Cardinals. Musial's Left Buttock or whatever his user name is over there undoubtedly enjoyed the end of that season even though the vast majority of it wasn't good.
Fuck these guys.
Fuck these guys.
That Reddit mod aside, it seems dislike of the Cardinals stems more from their media treatment than anything they actively do (insert VPN hacking joke). In particular, any time I hear an ex-jock or broadcaster wax poetic about playing the game "the right way", I am turned off. The same applies for "best fans in baseball". I am amused at the cognitive dissonance from media members extolling the character of the Cardinals while shaking their finger at the baseball ops hacking. That has more to do with mediots, however, and has nothing to do with the Cardinals themselves.
Having just watched most of the Cardinals-Cubs series, I didn't find anything particularly unlikeable about the Cardinals team. As a Red Sox fan, I can't really summon the visceral dislike of a team we beat twice in the World Series. It just ain't there. I'm more impressed by how they keep re-stocking their team with cost controlled, dependable players.
Having just watched most of the Cardinals-Cubs series, I didn't find anything particularly unlikeable about the Cardinals team. As a Red Sox fan, I can't really summon the visceral dislike of a team we beat twice in the World Series. It just ain't there. I'm more impressed by how they keep re-stocking their team with cost controlled, dependable players.
This is completely true, and fully understandable.BaseballJones said:
However:
Can't have one without the other.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
smastroyin said:
Sort of a side point, but were we "the best fans in baseball" or "the most intelligent/knowledgeable/smartest fans in baseball"?
I seem to remember getting tagged as the latter.
Bob Costas is another reason to despise the Cardinals
When he stated that the ongoing hacking investiagation didn't matter and none of the higher ups in the Cardinals brass knew nothing of this, it was treated as gospel.
Because it is the Sainted St. Louis Cardinals
When he stated that the ongoing hacking investiagation didn't matter and none of the higher ups in the Cardinals brass knew nothing of this, it was treated as gospel.
Because it is the Sainted St. Louis Cardinals
Spacemans Bong said:
Yet in a growing and affluent market with the highest rents in the country, a vibrant tech industry that attracts a huge number of 20- and 30-something sports fans, and a huge flux of tourists coming through all summer long. Of course the Giants should be doing well.
I want to take a moment in particular to examine the claim that guy made about the 2015 NL Central being the toughest division in the history of the sport. I find perceptions of league and division quality to be particularly interesting because they so often seem to be skewed.
To me, the claim that the '15 NL Central is the toughest division in history seems patently ludicrous. I think one can make a solid case that it wasn't even the toughest division this year. On the face of it, it seems remarkable that three teams in a division finished with 100, 98, and 97 wins. All three of these teams were very good, no doubt. They were helped to those numbers, however, by the abject crappiness of the rest of the NL, including two horrible in-division teams.
When you look at the AL, none of the teams except maybe Toronto really stands out based on record, but there are far fewer bad teams as well. The AL East in particular doesn't really have any truly weak teams. The division's overall run differential is pretty extraordinary (and yes, a large part of that is Toronto, but it's also remarkable that the worst run differential in the division was the Red Sox at -5.)
There are more sub-70 win teams in the NL Central (2) than in the entire AL (1). How is this possible? The AL absolutely creamed the NL this year to the tune of a .613 win percentage in a 300 game sample. To put that in perspective, the overall AL mark is just under the Cardinals .617, and the NL's .387 is just shy of the Phillies MLB-worst .389.
So what exactly do we mean by the "toughest" division in baseball? Yes, the NL Central was a tight three team race -- but it was no tighter than the AL West where the second and third place teams ended up back by 2 and 3 games respectively, just like the NL Central. I've no doubt that there have been divisional races that ended up being closer. No, I think that the gaudy win totals of the three top NL Central teams is really what is driving that claim, but the numbers suggest that this is likely a result of poorer competitive balance in the NL overall. Yes, the Cubs, Cards, and Pirates all had to play each other a lot. But they got to spend the rest of their season beating up on mostly really bad teams. The quality of play in the AL, on the other hand, was much higher on average.
To me, the claim that the '15 NL Central is the toughest division in history seems patently ludicrous. I think one can make a solid case that it wasn't even the toughest division this year. On the face of it, it seems remarkable that three teams in a division finished with 100, 98, and 97 wins. All three of these teams were very good, no doubt. They were helped to those numbers, however, by the abject crappiness of the rest of the NL, including two horrible in-division teams.
When you look at the AL, none of the teams except maybe Toronto really stands out based on record, but there are far fewer bad teams as well. The AL East in particular doesn't really have any truly weak teams. The division's overall run differential is pretty extraordinary (and yes, a large part of that is Toronto, but it's also remarkable that the worst run differential in the division was the Red Sox at -5.)
There are more sub-70 win teams in the NL Central (2) than in the entire AL (1). How is this possible? The AL absolutely creamed the NL this year to the tune of a .613 win percentage in a 300 game sample. To put that in perspective, the overall AL mark is just under the Cardinals .617, and the NL's .387 is just shy of the Phillies MLB-worst .389.
So what exactly do we mean by the "toughest" division in baseball? Yes, the NL Central was a tight three team race -- but it was no tighter than the AL West where the second and third place teams ended up back by 2 and 3 games respectively, just like the NL Central. I've no doubt that there have been divisional races that ended up being closer. No, I think that the gaudy win totals of the three top NL Central teams is really what is driving that claim, but the numbers suggest that this is likely a result of poorer competitive balance in the NL overall. Yes, the Cubs, Cards, and Pirates all had to play each other a lot. But they got to spend the rest of their season beating up on mostly really bad teams. The quality of play in the AL, on the other hand, was much higher on average.
Final 2015 strength of schedule ranking:
Cubs 23rd, Cards 24th, Pirates 25th, Reds 16th, Brew 17th
Orioles 1st, Rays 2nd, Yankees 3rd, Red Sox 4th, Jays 13th
https://www.teamrankings.com/mlb/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other/
Cubs 23rd, Cards 24th, Pirates 25th, Reds 16th, Brew 17th
Orioles 1st, Rays 2nd, Yankees 3rd, Red Sox 4th, Jays 13th
https://www.teamrankings.com/mlb/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other/
Yeah, I've been saying this for a few months now, thanks for going into it in such detail. Two factoids to add:
1) Seven of the eight worst teams in MLB were in the NL this year.
2) The Mets finished the season 38-22 after their deadline deals, 37-17 if you throw out their final week of coasting after they clinched. Over that period, they played all four non-Blue Jay AL East teams and lost series to TB/NYY/BOS while splitting 2 with BAL, going 4-7 overall, while they were going 33-10 against the rest of their cream-puff laden schedule. I don't think they make the playoffs as an AL team, I think they'd be in the same boat as teams like CLE and BOS, coming on strong late, but not enough to make up for the first part of the season.
Also I think it's illuminating to actually spell out the run differential by division, which makes it clear that the NL Central wasn't even the best division this year, let alone of all time:
AL East: +304
AL Central: -85
AL West: +10
NL East: -297
NL Central: +108
NL West: -40
One might argue that TOR's massive run differential skews that, which there is some truth to, but even if you subtracted their entire +221. the AL East still wouldn't be too far behind the NL Central, and if you dropped out both TOR and STL, the AL East is still way ahead (AL East: +83, NL Central: -14).
1) Seven of the eight worst teams in MLB were in the NL this year.
2) The Mets finished the season 38-22 after their deadline deals, 37-17 if you throw out their final week of coasting after they clinched. Over that period, they played all four non-Blue Jay AL East teams and lost series to TB/NYY/BOS while splitting 2 with BAL, going 4-7 overall, while they were going 33-10 against the rest of their cream-puff laden schedule. I don't think they make the playoffs as an AL team, I think they'd be in the same boat as teams like CLE and BOS, coming on strong late, but not enough to make up for the first part of the season.
Also I think it's illuminating to actually spell out the run differential by division, which makes it clear that the NL Central wasn't even the best division this year, let alone of all time:
AL East: +304
AL Central: -85
AL West: +10
NL East: -297
NL Central: +108
NL West: -40
One might argue that TOR's massive run differential skews that, which there is some truth to, but even if you subtracted their entire +221. the AL East still wouldn't be too far behind the NL Central, and if you dropped out both TOR and STL, the AL East is still way ahead (AL East: +83, NL Central: -14).