Pirates Clinch 17th Consecutive Losing Season
The Bucs clinched their 17th consecutive losing season, setting a record for major American sports, with a 4-2 loss against the Cubs today.
Today's loss was actually reasonably typical of this year's team, from the seven innings I saw. They didn't pitch terribly well, but they didn't pitch horribly, either. The fielding was fine. There wasn't anybody in the lineup who obviously doesn't belong in the majors. They weren't embarrassing. But they just didn't hit enough. PNC was mostly empty due to the rain, and many of the remaining spectators were Cubs fans, watching the Pirates play mediocre, but not horrible, baseball.
If there's any sort of thread that connects the 1993 squad that began all this losing to the 2009 version, I don't see it. In fact, I'm too young to really put the first several years of the streak into perspective, and I associate most of the middle years with horrible, blunderous baseball played mostly by guys who either didn't belong in the big leagues at all or were so old that the Pirates shouldn't have been bothering with them. (Not that those categories are mutually exclusive.) This version of the team really has neither of those problems. They're just not good enough right now.
Given what Frank Coonelly and Neal Huntington inherited, that's no surprise, and the obvious strides the Pirates made with young players, in the minors and with some in the majors, this year, suggest that someday soon things are going to be different. And so, although I know I'm supposed to feel some sort of disgust about this epic skid of losing seasons, I simply don't. I felt it three years ago when Dave Littlefield was running the team into the ground. I'm not a football fan, but my brothers are both hardcore fans, and I was sitting on the couch with them when they saw that the Raiders had traded a 2011 first-round pick (quite possibly a top ten pick) to the Patriots for Richard Seymour. That was an extreme version of the sorts of bizarre moves Littlefield made on a regular basis. Whether you like what the Bucs have done the past two years or hate it, there's a coherent rationale behind about 95% of the moves they've made. If Coonelly and Huntington can get this ship turned around, then being a Pirates fan is going to feel great for once.
47 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It has been a long season...
…but now that 17 is done, it’s really time to put the past in the past and really focus on the future. There is a lot to like about the Pirates organization. The major league team may not be there yet, but the productive pieces we do have plus the top players in AA and AAA seem to add up to a pretty good team by 2011. And that team will have quality depth coming up from our current A ball teams etc. Yes, that means 17 will probably be followed by 18, but I don’t believe that streak makes it to 19. Here’s to celebrating 82 wins rather than 82 losses in 2011!
Sh*t happens
I’m not bothered by it, whatever. I’m sure I will get annoyed with the national media coverage for three reasons. One, they act as if the Pirates don’t exist at all other times; two, they are not going to distinguish this team from past trainwrecks, as Charlie has done and three, they will make 0 mention of what Huntington and Coonelly are trying to do.
The New York Times piece I linked yesterday is notable for not falling into either of the last two traps.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Sep 7, 2009 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions
don't listen to Colin Cowturd the next few days
Or PTI for that matter…….they are relentless haters of the Pirates
by BadAndy on Sep 7, 2009 4:11 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Well, I was thinking of something like the Tyler Yates trade, which wasn’t any sort of disaster but didn’t make any sense in the context of a long-term plan.
by Charlie Wilmoth on Sep 7, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Torres
And, although Diaz has worked out nicely, the Bautista trade was borderline IMO.
by JRoth95 on Sep 7, 2009 4:46 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Not that he was a “keeper;” it just smelled like a dump – a plausible ML bench guy for a guy whose ceiling appeared (and appears) to be mediocre backup catcher. Diaz has played nicely – probably a bit above expectations – but he’s still a marginal major leaguer, albeit at a position more valuable than Bautista’s.
It’s probably worth noting here that Bautista, while we’d all given up on his future, was a much better 3B than LaRoche. Not that this was foreseeable 15 months ago, but I think it should be kept in mind – Bautista is (I would argue) in the mental category “Failed Prospects of the Past” while LaRoche is in the category “Disappointing Prospects Who Might Still Have a Future.” Which is fine as far as it goes, but it obscures the fact that this team would have won more games with Joey Bats at 3B than with LaRoche at 3B.
Again, I don’t think it was a terrible trade – it was at least 2 orders of magnitude better than the Torres one – just that I think it’s in the category of not especially sound/rational trades.
No, Bautista was not a “much better 3B than LaRoche”; his hitting was a little better, but his glove was a lot worse. Bautista’s best year was 2007 where he was 1.1 WAR, LaRoche is 1.4 WAR this year…since WAR isn’t that precise, all we can say is that neither is a very good everyday 3B. Of course, LaRoche still has more potential because he’s 4 years younger.
Because his glove is so bad, Bautista doesn’t make much sense as a bench player. Vazquez fills the utility infielder role better than Joey would’ve and his OPS is only 30 pts less this year.
Very true.
Bautista was one of the worst gloves on the shaky 2008 defense. 2,400 career innings at 3B, -10.6/150 per UZR. Not having Bautista at third is one of the things that let Duke and Maholm start the year so hot.
OK
I knew his glove was worse; I didn’t actually think it was that much worse.
That said, I’m not sure why it should be true that a utility guy with a glove* but no bat is more valuable to a poor-hitting team than a utility guy with no glove and a good bat. Vazquez may only be 30 points below JB this season, but he’s 70 points below for his career. I’m pretty sure that’s a lot.
Also, of course, the LaRoche-Bautista comparison is incidental – in a straight-up trade, that would have been a good deal, if only for the age. But Bautista was traded for a guy who will will never add a win to the team. Still smells like a marginal move to me (most plausible reasoning for it: to allow NH to move Paulino for a non-catcher, which is smart. But it would have left the Pirates with only Diaz as a backup for the perpetually-injured Doumit, which would be a bad outcome).
- And, oh look, Vazquez glove is a run worse at 3B than JB’s. Funny, that. (Yes, I know, he can play a passable SS; still an interesting comparison)
Vazquez isn't a replacement for JB.
Vazquez is a replacement for Chris Gomez. A guy to play shortstop when the starting shortstop gets a day off. Bautista can’t do that.
If Bautista wasn’t traded, he was in very real danger of getting non-tendered over the offseason. He was going to be arb-eligible, and he settled for $2.4M last offseason. That’s a hell of a lot for a .677 OPS with below-average D at the positions he can handle.
If you think we should’ve gotten more for Bautista, that’s your right, but I think his value at the time of the deal was pretty low, and it’s only gone down since.
Kind of reminds me of that T.S. Eliot quotation, “this is the way the world ends, not with a bang but a whimper”
Boring game, just mediocre play, not blown out of the water but never really close, no one saw it in person and judging by the number of comments on the game thread not many people watched it either.
Kind of defines the Pirates over the past 17 years if you ask me.
I made most of my life decisions at a Foghat concert... I stand by them.
by Chester J Lampwick on Sep 7, 2009 4:03 PM EDT reply actions
I had work to do today.
I heard some of it through the voice of Ron Santo and Pat Hughes on the radio this afternoon. I quit listening after 7 innings. I knew they were going to lose.
I hadda work today, too.
(Ah, the joys of retail – sigh)
…and we were just busy enough that I couldn’t hardly listen to WGN Radio ( I LOVE listening to Santo – particularly when things are going bad for the Cubbies, so that’s a lot!), but what I did hear sounded like the Cubs made a coupla good plays on D to keep us out of some potentially good situations.
I’m bolting out of work early tomorrow to watch it on teevee, and will be able to watch and gamethread both days. I love the gamethreads.
You guys are all invited over to watch, too.
Except lumberco.
Heh.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 7, 2009 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Just like yesterday?
when they were down 4-1 in the sixth and 5-4 in the ninth. Please share your crystal ball with me or go easy on the “I knew” lines.
I knew...
Ok, I just had a feeling they would lose. If they didn’t, well, I missed out on the suffering of Ron Santo….
by IAPiratesFan on Sep 7, 2009 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions
More than anything else from the current streak, they remind me of the 64-98 1986 team, except that they’ve traded away many of the veterans this year (rather than waiting until the next season, as Syd Thrift did in ’87). As Bill James wrote in the 1987 Abstract:
There are two primary points to be made about the Pirates at the outset. One is that they are on the bring of being a much better team than they have been. The other is that, because they do have a few pieces missing, they have been forced to ask some players to do things that they’re not really capable of doing. Once the point is reached at which they can stop doing this, those individuals will probably play better, and the team may improve quickly.
The 17 losing seasons.
Locked up on the two year anniversary of the firing of Dave Littlefield. Just sort of a reminder that the guy who caused pretty much every losing season since the 2003 season ended was fired two years ago today and the guy who’s GM is not responsible for this mess.
I hate the losing and just want to see a winning baseball team in Pittsburgh. No fan in any sports, not even the Yankees, should have to wait more than 17 years for a winning season. The next few years will be interesting in the sense that we’ll get to see whether Neal Huntington is the real deal or not.
At least Pittsburgh has
the Steelers and Penguins. It isn’t baseball, but at least it’s something.
for real
imagine if you only had the reds and the bengals right now
I was at today's game....
…mainly as some sort of pseudo-historic event I thought might be cool to attend, and let me tell you guys, there was no better way to describe the past 17 years than the 82nd loss of the 17th season.
As Charlie mentioned, we didn’t play horrible, and were never really out of it, but you never felt we really had a chance either. There was just a feeling of the innings passing, without excitement or disappointment, onto the inevitable loss.
The flow of the game was matched by the weather. A constant day full of light drizzle, not enough rain to cancel the game, but just enough to make it unpleasent. It’s comparable to how the Pirates were never out of the game, just going through the motions, the weather wasn’t really bad per se, but it was just blah.
On top of it all, in our home ballpark, on a holliday weekend, PNC Park was invaved by Cubs fans. When Derek Lee hit 2 homers today, instead of hearing the typical silence or boos, you heard loud cheers and clapping throughout the stands.
I can’t think of a more fitting way for this streak to have been capped. The game, the weather, and the team were not all that bad, but they certainly weren’t good, which basically sums up the past 17 years.
Here’s to stopping it at 17.
Big fat hairy deal
With one exception, and not a very large one (83-79), the Royals have been losers for 15 straight seasons. Having that one slightly above-.500 year doesn’t make them any less losers than we are. And I’d have to guess that we’ll finally have a winning record well before they do. If the 1997 team had won two more games, we wouldn’t be hearing at all about this made-up “record,” but that wouldn’t make us any better than we are right now.
This
Show me a guy whos afraid to look bad, and I'll show you a guy you can beat every time. -Lou Brock
A bigger deal is made out of this than there should be. The 1918-1948 Phillies had 1 winning season (78-76 in 1932) in 31 years, which is much worse than what the Bucs have accomplished even though they poked their head above water once. The Royals are pretty much in the same position, though they might turn it around like us. There is hope going forward because while the team’s record has kept the status quo, the newly acquired talent, ownership and coaching have not.
If the team pokes its head above .500 once, it’s not worth celebrating. It will be if they can keep it up for several years in a row if the plan works.
a.k.a Gorkys'nBeans
so glad that this is finally done with
for the past year since we got to 16 years without a winner all we heard about was the pirates breaking this record. 17 years is a long time. but its not like its 20 i think if we slide to 20 losing years i mite be ready to give up hope, but not now, the future looks bright. so heres to moving on and not worring about the record, its ours. Now we can focus on having 17 winning years.
also to the guy who said joey bats was a questionable trade. the real question is why? you already saw what he could do, you dont know what diaz will do. he could be a vaulable player for years to come. if bautista was still around everyone would be wondering why he is still here. and Laroche still has a lot of up side, its only his first full big league season. i think he will eventually hit somewhere around .270 and hit 10-12hr with around 75-80 rbi. and i believe that he will and should be moved to 2b when alverez comes up. if he were to put up those kind of numbers as a second baseman he could be considered an above average secondbaseman. joey bats is a AAAA player.
Funny that we’re talking about Robinson Diaz. 23 years ago some fans were actually pumped about Mike “Rambo” Diaz as an emerging slugger because this journeyman masher managed 28 HRs over the ’86 & ’87 seasons. I remember a Rambo Diaz promo poster where he was holding 2 bats like machine guns with baseballs strapped like ammo. It was pretty ridiculous, almost like calling Garret Jones “The Legend.” As bad as the early/mid 80s Pirates were, it feels like a blip compared to the current streak.
Everyone focuses on 1992, but the real dread for me began a year earlier when Bonilla walked and Smiley was a salary dump. Bonds was FA eligible and negotiations on an extension were going nowhere. The best outfield in baseball was being ripped away in its prime and the Bucs would hedge on a myopic choice to resign Van Slyke instead of making a real commitment to Bonds. Smiley was gone and Drabek was soon to follow. Even the playoff appearances were bittersweet when you could read the writing on the wall. Pittsburghers were understandably not overly sympathetic to the players union or the owners and the pending labor dispute.
That said, I’m more optimistic about the state of the fanchise than I’ve been in ages, and it’s hard to connect the current players, coaches, or staff to the bad decisions of regimes past. They only own a small share of this piece of history, and they have a legitimate opportunity to break the cycle of losing.
Well said.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Sep 8, 2009 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
54 Years and Counting
Here’s another way to look at things. Desperate, perhaps, but these are desperate times.
The Pirates have won at least 35% of their games for 54 consecutive seasons. If they can win just three more their streak will reach 55 in a row.
There are plenty of clubs that can’t claim this. Like the Arizona Diamondbacks, Baltimore Orioles, Chicago White Sox, Detroit Tigers, Milwaukee Brewers, New York Mets, etc. The list goes on.
Feel better? I know I do!
As soon as we get rid of all these minor leaguers playing for us (Andy LaRoche, Brandon Moss, Neil Walker, Steve Pearce, Brian Bixler, even Charlie Morton may be a minor leaguer, but he’s still too young to tell), maybe we can win a few more games. The lineup is a joke. I’m just ready for Tabata, Alvarez, MCutchen and some of the players of the future to be in the lineup, and they should be from Day 1 next season. Awful, awful lineup right now.
Next year’s Opening Day lineup should be…
CF – McCutchen
2B – Young
1B – Jones
3B – Alvarez
C – Doumit
RF – Tabata
LF – Milledge
SS – Cedeno
pitcher
Are all thee young guys ready? That’s debatable, but they are FAR and AWAY better than anything else we have at those positions.
Morton isn't a ML-caliber starter?
That’s certainly an… interesting opinion.
Also, just for reference, the MLE on Tabata’s 2009 is right around a .600 OPS. We’d better hurry up and rush him to the majors before he’s ready, if we want to be able to keep complaining about watching minor league players.
I agree (as I’ve said before) that Tabata isn’t even close to ready, and it’s amazing that so many think he can just jump next year and start mashing.
- Gorkys'nBeans
by Adam Reynolds on Sep 8, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Well let's see...
Morton is a combined 7-15 in two years of Major League service, going 4-8 with a 6.15 ERA in 2008 with the Braves and going 3-7 with 5.43 ERA so far this season with the Pirates. Is that Major League caliber, buddy? Right now, he reminds me of a younger Ian Snell minus the headcase and finger pointing. He has great stuff, but can’t locate it and can’t avoid the big inning. Until he proves otherwise, he’s a AAAA player. Having said all of that, this is only his second season of service time, neither of wich have been full seasons. We’ll see what he can do next year.
JVB
That was my call when he was traded – ostensibly good stuff. limited MiL success, and no ML success to speak of. Arguably he’s outperformed JVB to date – I’m pretty sure he’s had 2-3 starts better than anything JVB ever did – but that’s an incredibly low bar to clear.
That said, too early to give up, of course. But it’s funny how adamant people are that he will (or has!) succeed.
Morton's raw 2009 ERA is skewed...
…by one game where he gave up ten runs in one inning. That one game added 1.70 to his ERA.
On a game-by-game basis, he’s actually been quite good. If you scratch his first start, where he left with an injury after four batters, he’s given up three runs or fewer in eight of his thirteen starts.
It’s also worth noting that his peripherals are significantly better than his raw ERA. His FIP this year is 4.43, only 0.05 behind Duke.
Officially mind-blowing losing streak trivia item
Who is the only player to play for the Pirates both during their 17 conesecutive losing seasons and for their last World Series championship team?
The Candyman!
I don’t think he ever covered first at any time during his long major league career. If he did, I missed the occasion.
now the hard trivia question...
how many players earned a World Series ring from another team after playing for the Pirates during this streak?
For all the hand wringing over the Pirates personnel moves, and perhaps not surprising, this is a pretty low number
my unscientific list
Tony Womack
Enrique Wilson
Tim Wakefield
Jay Bell
Dale Sveum
Bronson Arroyo
Charlie Hayes
Jeff Suppan
Luis Sojo
Alejandro Pena

by 

















