Are the Bucs the worst franchise in pro sports?

by Jason R on Jun 4, 2009 4:18 PM EDT Comment 14 comments

With the McLouth trade, it is becoming increasingly difficult to argue otherwise; a rogues' gallery of franchise failures

Pirate fans--myself among them--are wondering just what it will take for the team to become winners once again. Without a winning season since 1992, the Bucs are laughingstocks this season, not even waiting until the All-Star Break to trade away their best player in exchange for "prospects." An effective strategy if you are the Yankees or the Red Sox; not such a great idea if you just plan to trade away the prospects as well, once they become established players. That's what the Bucs do.

With another sub-.500 season looming as the Western Pennsylvania summer hangs hot and humid over half-empty PNC Park, we must ask ourselves: are the Pirates the worst franchise in professional sports?

It's hard to argue that they are not. After all, the probability that the Bucs will continue their futility, not only this year but perhaps for one or two decades to come. The worst team in sports? To wit:

The Detroit Lions, the NFL's first-ever 0-16 team, were indeed putrid last season. However, since the Pirates were last in the playoffs, the Lions made the post-season five times.

The Los Angeles Clippers, long the patsies of the NBA, have made the playoffs twice since the Pirates last did.

The Cincinnati Bengals, widely regarded as the worst NFL team of the 1990s, won a division championship in 2005 (only to lose to the Steelers when Bengals quarterback Carson Palmer was injured early in their playoff matchup).

But, you might be saying, Major League Baseball has fewer playoff spots than the NFL or the NBA. Yet...

Even the disgraceful Kansas City Royals had two winning season since the Pirates last did, logging a 64-51 record in the strike-shortened season of 1994 and going 83-79 in 2003.

Can anyone argue that the Pirates aren't the worst team in pro sports?

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.

0 recs | Comment 14 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Over what time frame? Post 1992, maybe. All-time, not even close obviously. I also think it is nearly impossible to compare franchise success in other sports because of different revenue systems (salary cap, etc.) and because of difference in playoffs (as you mentioned).

I’d say that Leeds United (not going to discuss here since it’s not an American team but I can if you want) and the LA Clippers have been worse than the Pirates post 1992. Clippers: so much wasted talent/busts like Lamar Odom, Elton Brand, etc. And have never been able to keep a good team together. Two years after going to the conference semis they finished at .280.

Also Donald Sterling is totally clueless. He’ll spend money for a while and then close his wallet completely which makes it very hard to build a team. Not even to mention personnel management and the mismatching players that have been brought in.

The Pirates have sucked balls since 1992, no one can argue differently but at least this current regime seems to have a plan for improvement unlike Donald Sterling.

I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.

by Chester J Lampwick on Jun 4, 2009 4:45 PM EDT reply actions

timeframe

My comparisons are for all teams in major pro sports at this point in time. Admitedly, Chester makes a strong point here that comparing leagues is a dicey affair at best—NBA teams in particular sometimes make the playoffs with a sub-.500 record, something that could never happen in MLB. Yet I still maintain that you can at least make the argument that in all of pro sports, the Pirates are currently the least succesful of all.

(In addition, I concur with your decision-making philosophy, Chester, since I am also a Fool For the City)

by Jason R on Jun 4, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions

I guess at this point in time, it’s hard to argue against 16 (soon to be 17) straight losing seasons. I just don’t think our failures have been as spectacular as some of the other teams (the mismanagement of the Clippers, the 0-16 Lions).

Maybe I’m also underestimating the scope of the Pirates failure because I feel hopeful with the new regime.

I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.

by Chester J Lampwick on Jun 4, 2009 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Also, we haven't lost ALL of our games in a season like the Lions

While we haven’t been decent since 1992, we also haven’t had individual periods of incompetence that were the calibre of the Matt Millen Lions.

by houksyndrome on Jun 4, 2009 5:10 PM EDT reply actions

“With the McLouth trade, it is becoming increasingly difficult to argue otherwise…”

This trade does not support the argument that the Pirates are a poorly run franchise; the trade supports the exact opposite. For the 14 millionth time, this is exactly the kind of trade that WELL RUN organizations make, the kind of trade an organization makes when it is truly interested becoming winners, and not just wallowing in mediocrity.

by brooklynpirate on Jun 4, 2009 5:19 PM EDT reply actions

missing the point...

I would agree with brooklyn here that the prospects received for McLouth could end up being outstanding players. However, it is not the trade itself that is the problem; it instead is the fact that current Bucs management refuses to invest in potential superstar players in the long term. I was pretty clear about that in my initial post…

by Jason R on Jun 4, 2009 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions

your missing the point

this trade was an investment in McCutchen. something had to be done in the outfield to make room. McClouth was the only outfielder they could get value for. Also MCLOUTH IS NOT A SUPERSTAR, not even close(Unless you consider Adam LaRoche a superstar their numbers last year were about the same)

by bucfan2105 on Jun 4, 2009 6:59 PM EDT up reply actions

Exactly...

Why the hell would they invest in a player like Nate who is a poor defender in center, despite the gold glove, and would be a light hitting corner outfielder when moved there. He would be nearing or at age 30 when this team plans to be competive so why not cash in on his max value? It was already stated that the Pirates didn’t shop him around. The Braves blew them away with an offer they loved for Nate, who is an above average player, not a star. The Pirates and well run, small market teams like them, will never pay for the services of players like Bay and Nady for their over the hill years either. That isn’t the smart way to run a team if you have a budget. Don’t like it? You could always become a Yankees fan Jason.

So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded!? Yea, totally. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets do a sample. There are 4 of us and you're retarded. Thats 25 percent. -South Park; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce.

by gorillakilla34 on Jun 5, 2009 3:07 AM EDT up reply actions

I'm a Clippers fan as well...

…and I will say this, the Pirates will have a winning season before the Clippers. The franchise has always been run like a newbie fantasy baseball team. Sometimes you get Sam Cassell’s last productive year, but you don’t get continuous development.

weak-hitting corner outfielder in beer league baseball

by Bukanier on Jun 4, 2009 6:27 PM EDT reply actions

not even close

to the raiders. yes they have had championships but the fact is the team has largley been irrelevant for much longer then the buccos. one year where they made the SB does not redeem al davis for years of stupidity

" I AM CAPATIN CHAOS, and this is my trusty Sidekick cato. Say hello Cato"
Dom Deluise 1933-2009, Cannonball run

by oldtimehockey09 on Jun 4, 2009 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions

Expos/ Nationals

countless losing seasons playing in quebec. Had an amazing team the year of the strike and never got their shot. Traded away among others: Randy Johnson, Bartolo Calon, Pedro Martinez, Moises Alou, Larry Walker, los Vlad Guerrero. Team was taken over by MLB rather than being contracted. Played home games in Puerto Rico. Became the Washington Nationals and have been a joke since becoming a team. Owner is a cheapskate, voted one of the worst in baseball recently. GM kept trading for other peoples unwanted outfielders. Resigned under investigation for bonus skimming. Team also gave a multi million dollar bonus to a guy who was lying about his age. Play in one of the US’s biggest markets and cannot get anyone to come to their brand new stadium.

RIP NATE. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN...MISTER TONY PLUSH!

by GTrain on Jun 4, 2009 10:33 PM EDT reply actions

agreed even though i wear my nationals hat all the time

they at least have the best logo in sports…

I GOT MY STREET BUZZ BEFORE I GOT MY PEACH FUZZ

by omar moreno on Jun 5, 2009 8:48 AM EDT up reply actions

I’ll take issue here and say that the Expos could very well have won the NL East in 1994 if not for the season ending strike. That makes them 2 years better than the Pirates.

by Blyleven Curve Ball on Jun 5, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions

Maybe, but the McLouth trade is a sign of a turnaround

Currently they are the worst in sports. But the McLouth trade is a sign that it is turning around. If the Bucs weren’t worried about winning they would have kept a cheep McClouth to sell a few jerseys. But they traded an average major league player for three players that can help the long term success of the team.

What about the Redskins? All that money with nothing to show for it? If the Buccos had those kind of resources we wouldn’t be having this discussion

by bucfan2105 on Jun 5, 2009 2:29 PM EDT reply actions