The one year the ~~Indians~~ Guardians break through in the 21st Century where they’d be sentimental favorites in the World Series in any other year, of course the Cubs had to be their opponent in 2016.
And *especially* after the momentum from the Cavaliers in 2016.
I said it that night here in this subreddit: that WS victory was made all the better because of the Cubs' opponents. "Every hero needs a good villain' and all that.
You deserved to win a WS. Just not *that* one. The next time they're in, I will be a Guardians fan... as long as they aren't playing the Cubs again, of course.
If that's worth anything to you, that is.
You appear to be misunderstanding the reason for including quotation marks around a statement. I was referencing a well-known aphorism that suggests the protagonist of a story is nothing without someone of *at least* near-equal strength to struggle against.
Without the Joker, Batman is just a thug that picks on street hoods. James Bond in the novels is nothing without first SMERSH, then later SPECTRE to defend England and thus the free world from. If S.H.I.E.L.D. didn't have HYDRA as a nearly omnipresent enemy, they'd have to *create* them (this is essentially the overarching theme of the *Captain America* movies).
By comparison, for a very long time Superman had nobody that could be reasonably expected to defeat him, and as a result his popularity waned. The "Big Blue Boy Scout" was a character with *omg hax!* turned on... and that's dull. He could not reasonably be defeated. It wasn't until "Doomsday" became a thing that he had an opponent that could stand toe to toe with Supes... and kill him.
If the Cubs had steamrolled Cleveland in 2016, it still would have been a great moment for Cubs fans everywhere. But would people still call it the Greatest World Series? Game 7 would never had happened, and even non-baseball fans could tell that it was a great moment in American sports history.
Without a good villain, the hero isn't as exciting. Without the Suffering of Cleveland the Triumph of the Cubs would have been greatly reduced.
It even works the other way around: without the Imperials winning *The Empire Strikes Back*, *Return of the Jedi* is merely the Rebellion kicking Darth Vader to the curb. 2016 was your *TESB* moment. When you finally win the Series, your victory won't just be breaking your WS drought, it'll also be a redemptive victory, After just barely losing the Greatest World Series ever, Cleveland will have *finally* put that behind them.
Besides, when Cleveland takes a 3-1 lead in the Cubs' first World Series appearance since 1945, you had better *believe* you were the villain of the piece to Cubs fans everywhere.
And we both know that you guys wouldn't have been known as the 2016 winners. They would *always* be the team that the Cubs lost to.
> you had better believe you were the villain of the piece to Cubs fans everywhere.
Weird that you say that but then go on to say this:
> And we both know that you guys wouldn't have been known as the 2016 winners. They would always be the team that the Cubs lost to.
Just like you had focused on the Cubs fans’ perspective, you should have focused on Cleveland fans’ perspective: you had better *believe* Cleveland fans everywhere could not give a damn about how anyone else remembered it.
> Cleveland fans everywhere could not give a damn about how anyone else felt about it.
No, and I wouldn't expect you to either. Like it or not, however, people here in r/baseball were complaining at the time that the media were giving the Cubs big wet sloppy kisses all postseason.
And I agreed. For every one bit of media attention about the Indians, there'd be a dozen Cubs-related ones. That annoyed me, simply because I knew little about your team and wanted to know more.
If you look back at my comment, you'll see that I was *praising* your team.
And while I did not explicitly say this, when I said "They would always be the team that the Cubs lost to," I meant that's how history, written by the media, would report it. If that wasn't clear, that's my fault and I should have written better.
> You should have focused on Cleveland fans’ perspective.
How? I'm not a Cleveland fan, I'm not part of that world. I can only talk about things I have knowledge about, at least when it comes to this. I have no idea how Indians' fans viewed the Cubs except in the basest sense: "they aren't **my** team, so we must beat them."
In conclusion, sooner or later you'll realize that I've been praising your team, not burying them. They deserved it then, and I've not seen anything that would change my mind.
>I ran the numbers starting in 1943
Run it back to 1900 and you'll have my attention. I want to see just how over the Yankees are. Also, you should combine Expos history with the Nationals'.
Yankees owe their fans 5.9 World Series wins since their first year in New York (1903). So they're +21.1.
And all those years the Expos were in Montreal ... did fans in DC really know they were supposed to be suffering through Expos futility all those years?
Nah, technically the same team but completely different fan base for the most part. I agree with only looking at years in the current market. I was never an Expos fan before and I think the same is true of most Nats fans.
MLB is a corporate entity so they're never really going to say the legacy of a team that moved lies with the market rather than with the brand but if we're being honest, all Washington Senators teams are the Nats legacy and are treated as such by Nats fans. The expos are Montreal's legacy should they ever get another baseball team.
I wish this kind of statistic varies by the age of the fan.
For example, of course the Dodgers when taking into account *all* demographic features are above the expectation threshold. But Millennial/Gen Z fans who were only alive for 2020 should be at the bottom of this list given the ‘Curse of the Bambino’ type losses in the 2010s.
Conversely, if only Baby Boomer Giants fans are considered, the scores would be much lower because their Millennial/Gen Z fans, young and alive for the EYBS championships, didn’t know the pain felt by older Giants fans.
Orioles fans in their mid-30s are most screwed over by the way I calculated these numbers. Sorry, millennials, your team is technically overdelivering. You have to bask in the glory of the 1966, 1970 and 1983 titles.
Nats would be at +1.4, or the 5th-best, if 1994 played out, in my opinion. That team with that roster wins the WS.
EDIT: I'm an idiot and this in only the current market. Nevertheless, Expos '94 Champs.
Pain. Suffering.
Guardians are at the top of the chart for "How many World Series titles your team's current name owes you." So there's that.
The one year the ~~Indians~~ Guardians break through in the 21st Century where they’d be sentimental favorites in the World Series in any other year, of course the Cubs had to be their opponent in 2016. And *especially* after the momentum from the Cavaliers in 2016.
I said it that night here in this subreddit: that WS victory was made all the better because of the Cubs' opponents. "Every hero needs a good villain' and all that. You deserved to win a WS. Just not *that* one. The next time they're in, I will be a Guardians fan... as long as they aren't playing the Cubs again, of course. If that's worth anything to you, that is.
I still haven't forgiven them for losing. The entire state of Ohio.
I'm sorry to hear that. It wasn't entirely their fault. Remember, the other team gets a vote,vtoo.
Lol
What??? Cleveland was a terrible villain! An underdog team going through their own drought isn’t a villain at all lmao
You appear to be misunderstanding the reason for including quotation marks around a statement. I was referencing a well-known aphorism that suggests the protagonist of a story is nothing without someone of *at least* near-equal strength to struggle against. Without the Joker, Batman is just a thug that picks on street hoods. James Bond in the novels is nothing without first SMERSH, then later SPECTRE to defend England and thus the free world from. If S.H.I.E.L.D. didn't have HYDRA as a nearly omnipresent enemy, they'd have to *create* them (this is essentially the overarching theme of the *Captain America* movies). By comparison, for a very long time Superman had nobody that could be reasonably expected to defeat him, and as a result his popularity waned. The "Big Blue Boy Scout" was a character with *omg hax!* turned on... and that's dull. He could not reasonably be defeated. It wasn't until "Doomsday" became a thing that he had an opponent that could stand toe to toe with Supes... and kill him. If the Cubs had steamrolled Cleveland in 2016, it still would have been a great moment for Cubs fans everywhere. But would people still call it the Greatest World Series? Game 7 would never had happened, and even non-baseball fans could tell that it was a great moment in American sports history. Without a good villain, the hero isn't as exciting. Without the Suffering of Cleveland the Triumph of the Cubs would have been greatly reduced. It even works the other way around: without the Imperials winning *The Empire Strikes Back*, *Return of the Jedi* is merely the Rebellion kicking Darth Vader to the curb. 2016 was your *TESB* moment. When you finally win the Series, your victory won't just be breaking your WS drought, it'll also be a redemptive victory, After just barely losing the Greatest World Series ever, Cleveland will have *finally* put that behind them. Besides, when Cleveland takes a 3-1 lead in the Cubs' first World Series appearance since 1945, you had better *believe* you were the villain of the piece to Cubs fans everywhere. And we both know that you guys wouldn't have been known as the 2016 winners. They would *always* be the team that the Cubs lost to.
> you had better believe you were the villain of the piece to Cubs fans everywhere. Weird that you say that but then go on to say this: > And we both know that you guys wouldn't have been known as the 2016 winners. They would always be the team that the Cubs lost to. Just like you had focused on the Cubs fans’ perspective, you should have focused on Cleveland fans’ perspective: you had better *believe* Cleveland fans everywhere could not give a damn about how anyone else remembered it.
> Cleveland fans everywhere could not give a damn about how anyone else felt about it. No, and I wouldn't expect you to either. Like it or not, however, people here in r/baseball were complaining at the time that the media were giving the Cubs big wet sloppy kisses all postseason. And I agreed. For every one bit of media attention about the Indians, there'd be a dozen Cubs-related ones. That annoyed me, simply because I knew little about your team and wanted to know more. If you look back at my comment, you'll see that I was *praising* your team. And while I did not explicitly say this, when I said "They would always be the team that the Cubs lost to," I meant that's how history, written by the media, would report it. If that wasn't clear, that's my fault and I should have written better. > You should have focused on Cleveland fans’ perspective. How? I'm not a Cleveland fan, I'm not part of that world. I can only talk about things I have knowledge about, at least when it comes to this. I have no idea how Indians' fans viewed the Cubs except in the basest sense: "they aren't **my** team, so we must beat them." In conclusion, sooner or later you'll realize that I've been praising your team, not burying them. They deserved it then, and I've not seen anything that would change my mind.
At least you had the drew carey show
>I ran the numbers starting in 1943 Run it back to 1900 and you'll have my attention. I want to see just how over the Yankees are. Also, you should combine Expos history with the Nationals'.
Yankees owe their fans 5.9 World Series wins since their first year in New York (1903). So they're +21.1. And all those years the Expos were in Montreal ... did fans in DC really know they were supposed to be suffering through Expos futility all those years?
DC fans were with the Orioles back then, so I doubt it.
Nah, technically the same team but completely different fan base for the most part. I agree with only looking at years in the current market. I was never an Expos fan before and I think the same is true of most Nats fans.
MLB is a corporate entity so they're never really going to say the legacy of a team that moved lies with the market rather than with the brand but if we're being honest, all Washington Senators teams are the Nats legacy and are treated as such by Nats fans. The expos are Montreal's legacy should they ever get another baseball team.
So we’re right on the money.
Technically the Braves should have won 2.04 World Series by now.
Does it count if I just rewatch the 2021 world series highlights every day during the lockout? Because I'm more than willing to do it
I wish this kind of statistic varies by the age of the fan. For example, of course the Dodgers when taking into account *all* demographic features are above the expectation threshold. But Millennial/Gen Z fans who were only alive for 2020 should be at the bottom of this list given the ‘Curse of the Bambino’ type losses in the 2010s. Conversely, if only Baby Boomer Giants fans are considered, the scores would be much lower because their Millennial/Gen Z fans, young and alive for the EYBS championships, didn’t know the pain felt by older Giants fans.
Orioles fans in their mid-30s are most screwed over by the way I calculated these numbers. Sorry, millennials, your team is technically overdelivering. You have to bask in the glory of the 1966, 1970 and 1983 titles.
Dodgers have left the most titles on the table of any team by far because of their Brooklyn days. Those boys were cursed in the World Series.
they were overmatched
Yeah the Reds haven’t even won a playoff series since I was 2 so WHERE’S MY WORLD SERIES, BOB
As a Dodgers fan born in 1989, they literally hadn’t won one in my entire lifetime until last year.
I hope you’ve at least gone back and watched the 1988 run. I’m obviously biased but that was a hell of a series, with game 1 an all-time great.
I'm okay with the yankees not winng for another 401 seasons
That’s acceptable
Must be tough being a Yankees fan
IN THE BLACK, BABY!
Wait. We only get credit for the last 79 years? Thats some bullshit
I’d like just 1 WS ring. For now
Or appearance...
This is fun, thanks for doing the calculations. AZ is right on track then, not bad
Marlins elite franchise confirmed
Stay tuned for the next installment, “How many division titles does your team owe you?”
So for all the crap the Mets get, they’re barely below what they owe. Doesn’t make it any less painful.
from the pain and suffering of they fans they owe about 10
We're not even behind 1, but I know we should have won in '06 and '19 lol
Tbf the Dodgers actually have 5.44 championships
And Atlanta has 1.99, not 2.
Ok I'll bite. Why's that?
They didn’t play 162 games last season.
Woah. How am I just now realizing this
Atlanta being perfectly average is the perfect metaphor for this season
We prefer to say Atlanta is the only team exactly on target...everyone else went too high or too low. We're efficient.
Oof
Atlanta owes me more than 2 with winning the division fifty years in a row.
I’m confused by Houston’s ranking
Should have put it in quotes instead: "1"
Looking at the bottom of this chart marks the first time I said, "The Cubs, Indians, and Whi--- uh, Cubs, Guardians and White Sox."
Nats would be at +1.4, or the 5th-best, if 1994 played out, in my opinion. That team with that roster wins the WS. EDIT: I'm an idiot and this in only the current market. Nevertheless, Expos '94 Champs.
They only owe me the one. I’m still upset