BP Comment Quick Links
| Home | Unfiltered | Articles | Newsletter | Statistics | Fantasy | Events | Radio | Glossary | Search |
![]() |
|
|
|
August 19, 2005 Prospectus MatchupsThey're Going the DistanceBIGGEST MISMATCHUP (opponents with greatest difference in Prospectus Hit List rankings): Kansas City Royals (30th) @ Oakland A’s (4th) What is this obsession we have with eliminating the 19th century from consideration when discussing all-time records? I understand why we do it for certain things, like pitcher wins, but what differentiates a losing streak in the 19th century from one in the 21st? It’s pretty simple: two teams go out on a field, one wins, one loses--that’s universal. A team stringing together losses 110 years ago is pretty much following the same concept as a team stringing together losses right now. I bring this up because we are, with the poor unfortunates from Kansas City piling up the losses before our very eyes, seeing references to the teams with the all-time losing streak records. Undeniably, the American League record is held by the 1988 Orioles. Had the American League gotten its start in the 19th century, though, and had some team lost more than 21 games in a row during that time, you would never hear it mentioned. We know this because, the 1961 Phillies are the team mentioned as holding the “modern” losing streak record at 23. This is not to take anything away from that club, but where are the props for the 1899 Cleveland Spiders? Those Adorable Arachnids (as they were known to fans--no, not really), tore off 24 straight losses between August 26 and September 16 of that year. Should it come with an asterisk? Yes--but not because it missed happening in the modern era by two years. Any asterisk attached to that streak should be there because of the chicanery that left the team in such a state. The Spiders, as you probably know, were denuded of their best players in a kind of pyramid scheme that was perfectly legal at the time. The 1889 Louisville Colonels of the American Association lost 26 games from May 22 to June 22. It is argued that the AA wasn’t quite major league, so, you’re free to dismiss that one if you are a fan of that argument, but, again--not because it happened in the 19th Century. If you’re casting about for folks to blame for the streak on the offensive side, here are the Royals' numbers during the 18 losses:
|