Monday, December 21, 2009

Worst Team of the Decade

I've been on this wrapping up the decade kick recently, so here goes another one, since everyone seemed to enjoy the All-Decade team thread.  Here's my question.  Who was the worst franchise of the decade? The best franchise is much easier to decide- The Yankees win that. They played in four World Series, winning two. Eight division titles and nine post-season berths.  No other team belongs in the conversation.

Now for the intresting part, who was MLB's worst franchise? I have limited it down to five franchises: Baltimore, Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Washington/Montreal and Cincinatti.  I will list some reasons why each should be considered the worst and why each should not (more than just overall record is considered). I will let you decide who wins.

First off is Baltimore
Why they are the worst
- losing record every season
- finished last place twice and next to last seven times
- As of 1999, the O's were second in MLB in attendence at 3.4 mil. 10 years later, they drew 1.9 mil last season

Why they aren't the worst
-The O's won 26 more games than bothe the Bucs and Royals
-O's fans got to watch Cal Ripken the first two seasons of the deacde.

Next is Cincinatti
Why they are the worst
-Nine losing seasons
-Five different managers

Why they aren't the worst
- Never finished in last place (thanks to being in same division as Buccos)
- Had one winning season
- Only three 90 loss seasons

Next is Pittsburgh
Why they are the worst
- Losing season every year
- Seven seasons of 90 plus losses
- Four managers
- Constant turnover in personnel to save money
- Complete lack of talent. They wouldn't have won even if they hadn't traded away their best players (Kendall, Ramirez, Bay, Benson,McLouth, Schmidt, Wilson, Sanchez etc.)
- Most famous hit during the decade came on a sausage (thank you Randall Simon)
-Only team to literally steal a base (Llyod McClendon)
- Incompeteant Management that made questionable moves
-They employed Dave Littlefield, enough said

Why they aren't
- Moved into best ballpark in America (Can't believe I went there.  So sad)
- In this particular discussion, they don't get credit for their previous seven losing seasons entering the decade
-Surprisingly, they don't have the majors worst record of the decade, but they are very close
-New management seems to have begun to add talent to the system

Kansas City Royals
Why they are the worst
- MLB worst 672-948, 12 games worse than the Bucs
- Averaged 95 losses per season
- A whopping four 100 loss seasons
- Finished in last 5 times.
- Lost 19 in a row at one point
- Also has incompetant management that makes questionable moves. For instance dealing a top prospect for Yuniesky Betancourt and his awful contract. Yuniesky Freakin Betancourt?

Why the aren't
- Had one winning season in 2003. They were in first place at the end of August.
-They have actually had some real talent. Carlos Beltran, Johnny Damon, Jermaine Dye, etc.
- Cy Young Award winner Zach Grienke speaks for himself.

Finally, Washington/ Montreal/Puerto Rico
Why they are the worst
-Finished last place 6 times, more than anyone else.
-Finished with the worst record in baseball the last 2 seasons
-Began the deacde in Montreal
-Super marketing strategy by their former owner Jeffery Loria who wouldn't broadcast radio games in English and wouldn't broadcast any games on television, while they were the Expos.
- Only franchise that Bud Selig threatened to contract
- Had to be taken over and run by the league
- While still in Montreal, they played 21 home games in Puerto Rico, over 2000 miles away from their home, equalling over 100 road games
- Moved to Washington
- While there, finished last 4 out of 5 seasons
- GM Jim Bowden had to resign due to a federal investigation about skimming signing bonuses from Latin Players.
- Cut loose guys like Grady Sizemore, Brandon Phillips,Vlad Guerrero, etc.  Even their mascot was dismissed
- The one that seals the deal though could be that they misspelled their names wrong on their jerseys. No excuse

Why they aren't
-Had three winning seasons
- Avereaged only 91 losses, which compared to the others is good
- 39.5 games better than Kansas City
- Drafted the most coveted pitcher in recent memory- Steven Strausburg

So who's the worst?  In my opinion, I'm taking Baltimore and Cincinatti out of the conversation.  The other 3 could all be good choices.  The choice should be the Pirates, but I'm actually putting stock into what they've done in acquiring talent.

That leaves the team with the worst record in Kansas City and hands down the most disfunctional franchise in Washington.  The Royals and Pirates has lost and lost badly, but they don't have the disfunctionality that Washington has. Also being threatened with contraction is a selling point. Also when I watch the Royals and Pirates lose, their names are spelled correctly on their uniforms.

Therefore, the worst franchise of the decade is the Washington/Montreal/Puerto Rico- Nationals/Expos.  Congrats to them.  Let me know your opinions.


  1. No way. Pirates win hands down. Like you said. they havent had one winning season. washington has

  2. How could you not pick the Bucs. Yet until reading that, I had no clue how bad the Royals and nationals truly suck as well

  3. Sorry, I dont agree. The question should have been- Who's worse than the Pirates. Answer- NOBODY

  4. also look at where franchises are headed. bucs,reds & orioles all have good legit talent in the minors. Nats have strausberg & this years #1, plus they had 3 winning season.

    Hands down, the Royals are the sorriest franchise of all. Worst record equals worst team and their minor leagues don't have near the talent as the others.

    Kansas City could win this award back to back. Poor Grienke

  5. There is no possible way you could say there was a worse team than the Pirates. The Pirates and Royals are 1 and 1a when it comes to being sorry ass franchises

  6. You always raise get points with your writing and have great insight when it come to the Bucs and baseball in general.

    However please quit being a Pirates apologist. Are you on their payroll sucking up to Bob Nutting? Call it what it is, the Pirates are the worst franchise in sports history

  7. that should read great points, not get points

  8. how is he being a pirates apologist? if you just look at the numbers, then the royals had the worst record and should be the worst team

  9. as bad as it is to be a bucs fan, could you imagine being a royals or nats fan? Nats or expos were definitely the worse franchise

  10. should rename the award the pittsburgh pirates award for futility. or the bob nutting award to be precise. bucs are definitely the worse of the decade for ownership purposes alone

  11. matt

    you forgot one other dubious distinction for the bucs. pirates were the only teasm during the decade to have the fans organize a protest against the owner

  12. I actually totally forgot about that. i was at that game, but the protest didn't go over that well. espn did recognize it though.

    actually kansas city fans did something similar earlier in the decade before the pirates did. all of the fans wore protest shirts and all stood up and turned their back to the game for a whole inning.

    It seemed a little more organized than the Pirates one. the royals fans did another protest after that where most of the fans just didnt go to their seats. they all stayed on the concourse for like the first 3 innings. i remember the outfield being totally empty and like 4 homers were hit

  13. are their any such thing as royals or nats fans? atleast the pirates have a fan base even though it's small and not knowledgable.

    as pathetic as the pirates were during the decade, the royals and nats were even more pathetic

  14. At least the other franchises have some hope each year. Being a Bucs fan you know one thing every year, they stink and whoever you do like or shows some progress, they gone. I would say the same for the Royals, althought they don't part with players as much and they have attempted to sign MLB level players: Gil Meche, Jose Guillen. They just draft poorly. I guess we can count on a consistent outcome and that's all I need, consistency. I do think you should have at least honorable mentioned the Rays. Until last year they were awful...Yancy

  15. In fact, I did have the Rays on my list and had they not reached the World Series and had a winning record last season they likely would have been the favorite to win the award

  16. However please quit being a Pirates apologist. Are you on their payroll sucking up to Bob Nutting?

    I don't know how you can say I have been a Pirates apologist. Obviously you are one of the few that are regular readers of my blog (and i thank you for that)but I am always very critical of the Pirates organization.

    I have often criticized everyone from the very top (he's obviously the easiest target) all the way down to the players and everyone in between.

    Fact being, is that there is more hope for this franchise now than there was in 2007 when Coonely and Huntington were brought in.

    You have to recognize that. That doesn't mean they will be successful but the chances are much better than before.

    Recognizing that should not make me a Pirates apologist

  17. What hope do they have? A bunch of minor leaguers. We've been relying on minor leaguers for 17 seasons and look where it got us.

    Mark my words. They will trade McCutchen, Alvarez and Lincoln all within 3 years of today.

    That's there M.O. and therefore they are hands down the worst franchise of all time. not just this decade

  18. Mark my words. They will trade McCutchen, Alvarez and Lincoln all within 3 years of today.

    I can't see how you could really make that statement either. First, they control all of their young guys rights until atleast 2015-2016. Hence the reason they made all of the deals last season anyway.

    Next, when has the NH regime dealt a star player in the middle of his contract- which they have cheap, just for the sake of dealing him. And don't say Nate Mclouth. I said STAR and the Bucs made out in that deal anyways.

    Now in five or 6 seasons, if the plan hasnt worked, they will likely do exactly that-deal everyone again. If that happens, I will hop off the wagon and have no hope, but until then, what they are doing makes sense in baseball terms

  19. Do you realize that the Pirates are gonna suck next season? Then what will you say about the young guys and all the trades? You will find a way to defend them and become exactly what i said- A Pirates Apologist

  20. Sure I do. In fact, the Bucs could be the worst team in the game next season. They shouldn't start to turn the corner til 2011, hopefully no later than 2012.

    you however are making my argument for me. You said it yourself. They are YOUNG and quite frankly more talented than anytime in the last 17 seasons.

    Alvarez, Lincoln and Tabata shouldn't even be considered until atleast June. Why start the arbritration clock a year earlier? it just doesn't make sense.

    Be patient with them. Let the young guys come up and show they can play at this level. Then after that, let's see what kind of commitment management really has to winning. Until then, your argument is ludicros. Everyone knows they won't be competitive next season. give these trades a couple seasons before you rip them apart. We may just have a couple of ballplayers to watch for a change now. Instead of the mediocre talent we have been forced to watch for the last 17 seasons

  21. Mediocre Talent? You are insane my friend. Have you forgotten Jack Wilson, jason bay, Xavier nady, Ian Snell, Freddy Sanchez, Nate McLouth and others.

    There was all the talent we needed. If management was committed to winning. They would have stuck with them instead of some damn minor leaguers.

  22. Your joking right? Bay is really the only truly talented player you listed and look at the dollars he is commanding. Looking back, would it have been nice to gotten more for him? Sure, but he didn't have the kind of season that he had last season while he was with the Pirates.

    The others, were average to above average players. Nothing more. management did give them a chance and all the did was together, lose alot of games.

    Getting value for these guys was a smart baseball decision. Now there is no telling if they were good trades or not until we see these guys in Bucco uniforms. Until then, your kidding yourself, if you looked at the organization as a whole and didn't realize that these moves were necessary to even have a remote chance at competeing in the future.

    None of those guys has never helped a team get over the top by the way. none of them has ever appeared in the post season, with the exception of Bay.

    my one rule has always been to see a player for what he really is. being a good player on a bad team, makes one nothing more than exactly that. It doesn't make a player a superstar

  23. Yeah Matt, you tell that A@#Hole

  24. You see, that's what wrong with Pirates fans. They don't understand anything about baseball. They can turn a simple fun discussion into the same old bs we always hear from their mouths.

    "The Pirates suck cause they always trade away their good players" that about sums it up.

    Good thread. I enjoyed reading it. Tough decision to choose between the Nats/Bucs and Royals. You could say a 3 way tie. Im going to vote Nats though since you said it wasnt all about the record.

    Atleast the Bucs and Royals werent run by MLB and close to being contracted

  25. just shows how f'd up baseball is. no reason that franchises should be that bad for an extended peiod of time

  26. Worst Team of the deacade+Pittsburgh Pirates. Are you happy Bob Nutting, you piece of s@#t