The 2000s--A .500 Decade?
by MannyTrilloFlipsTo1B on Sep 28, 2009 4:55 PM CDT
Email
PrintIf the Cubs go 5-2 on this final homestand, they will have their first .500 decade since the 1930s. They would finish up the 2000s at 810-809 for a winning percentage of .5003. Over the last six decades, they have failed to break even, although they came closest in the 1970s at 785-828 (.487). Here is the breakdown:
1990s: 739-814 .476
1980s: 735-826 .471
1970s: 785-828 .487
1960s: 735-877 .456
1950s: 672-877 .434 (yikes!)
1940s: 736-813 .475
1930s: 889-655 .576
1920s: 807-736 .523
1910s: 826-688 .546
1900s: 879-621 .586
1890s: 710-683 .510
1880s: 691-412 .626 (the high water mark)
1870s: 154-116 .570
Note that the Cubs did not have a single losing decade out of their first seven, nor have they had a winning decade in the last six. This is all the more reason to finish strong and break the tradition of lovable losers. Let's have one more week of the same quality baseball they have been playing recently. Go Cubs!
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
33 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Some people will quibble with you on the definition of "decade".
However, as long as you are consistent with each of those and the “decade” is for a 10-year period starting with the year that ends in “0” and ending with the year that ends in “9”, the decades listed above are comparable.
You’re right, the 1950’s were kind of “yikes” all the way around.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I figure that if you ask someone when the 90s were,
they would say 1990-1999. I know the current decade has no name, but if it did have one, say, the “Zeroes,” years from now people will say,“Remember the Zeroes? That was when the Cub dynasty began.” And they will be referring to 2000-2009, as opposed to 2010-2019, which will always be remembered as “that decade when the Cubs won several pennants and titles.”
"Any old kind of run wins it!"--Jack Brickhouse
by MannyTrilloFlipsTo1B on Sep 28, 2009 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh, I agree with this completely.
Some of the nitpickers might not, though.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I'll pick that nit!
Show me a calendar for the year “0” . . .
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Sep 28, 2009 10:09 PM CDT up reply actions
+0.
(well, you get the idea…I agree. )
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
It's all arbitrary, anyway
And, no disrespect to the OP, but as Worf points out, meaningless.
Hell, if you want to define it in baseball terms, year “one” was 1876, anyway.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Sep 29, 2009 9:23 AM CDT up reply actions
My +0 was about "Calendar Year Zero". There wasn't one.
Yes, any 10 year period can be a decade.
"Pain don't hurt you none" - Sparky Anderson (1987)
Obviously Sparky was never a Cubs fan...
Year 0
There was a year 0. It was before the year 1.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_8601
If you refer to an event that happened 2009 years ago, you may say it occurred in1 BC, but others say is occurred in year 0.
While it is true the 201st decade in the Gregorian/Julian calendar is 2001 – 2010, the decade of the Aughts is 2000-2009.
Five wins in seven games vs. Pittsburgh and Arizona seems doable.
That article makes no mention of a year 0
That’s a standards reference. Do you think ISO was around 2009 years ago and created a calendar?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Sep 29, 2009 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions
Year 0000
It mentions year 0000 and contrasts with the BC calendar notation.
The common BC/BCE notation, for dates that are before year 0001, is not used. For instance, the year 3 BC can be denoted by −0002.(There is a difference of 1 because the BC system has no year zero.)
The Gregorian Calendar wasn’t created until the late 16th Century and was not accepted by English countries until the middle of the 18th Century. By then, astronomers and other scientists and historians had already recognized the need for a year 0.
by cliff on Sep 29, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1 for you
That’s a better link than the first one, btw
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Sep 29, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions
This comment is full of
WIN.
"Was you ever punched in the face five hundred times a night? It stings after a while." ~Rocky Balboa
Not quite
a decade would be 1951-1960, not 1950-1959
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Sep 29, 2009 5:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Decades
A decade is a period of ten years. (No link, trust me.)
1951-1960 was the 152nd decade of the Gregorian Calendar.
1950-1959 was the 6th decade of the 1900s.
We are coming to the end of the first decade of the 2000s. The first decade of the 21st Century (of the Gregorian Calendar) will not end until next year. The Cubs have a decent chance at a winning record in the first decade of the 2000s.
It's certainly something to root for
it will be close. I think we can do it
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Despite the Pirates big win over LA today...
… I think the Cubs can sweep them. The Pirates are 19-55 on the road this year.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
At home, where they nearly played .500 ball, 40-41.
They’re not nearly as good on the road. And the Cubs went 5-1 in Pittsburgh this year.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
The Dodgers are not playing well at all this month
They may be three-and-out if they don’t get things together. In any event, I don’t see them advancing past the first round.
by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Sep 29, 2009 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Yup
the 2009 Dodgers are almost the opposite of the 2008 Dodgers in terms of how they have played in September.
However, I must point out that you were ready to bury the Dodgers 6 weeks ago, saying that the Rockies were breathing down their throats. All the Dodgers have done in the interim is win the games they needed to win.
1977 and 1979 Cubs
Those are two over .500 seasons that should have been. The 1977 team was 76-64 before finishing 5-17 to go 81-81. The 1979 club was 71-59 before going 9-23 the rest of the way to finish at 80-82. The collapse at the end of 1979 led to some awful Cubs baseball that lasted until the second half of the 1982 season.
"The big possums walk late." - Harry Caray
I could not possibly care less about this
You know who has probably never had a winning decade? The Florida Marlins and Tampa Bay Rays
Both have won pennants and championships.
They win it all next year, they can go 0-1620 the next ten. I do not care.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
We are all entitled to our opinion, but I do care about this.
I’ve been wondering about this topic, since it seems to be that in this decade, the Cubs have won more than I’ve ever seen them win in my life. It’s been such a pleasant change from what I grew up with, and what I’ve put with most of my adult life, to hear the Cubs spoken of with more respect.
These days, yes, they are considered “cursed” by outsiders. But they are no longer considered “lousy”. You could argue that the futility of the Pirates has taken that title away from them, but that’s not the case. It’s nice to know that the title was lost by them through them winning, and not because someone else sucks.
IF IT TAKES FOREVER!!
by Cubfansince1957 on Sep 29, 2009 12:09 AM CDT up reply actions
However, the Pirates
are almost completly ignored, even though they keep losing. Their fan base has almost vanished. When the national meda takes a look at the franchise, the past success are always reviewed in comparison. (And their glory days aren’t THAT long ago.) The media’s take — “Former Championship team that has fallen on hard times.”
What’s the one-line summary on the Cubs? " Loveable losers since 1908."
I’d love to have 1970s World Series titles in my memory bank.
by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Sep 29, 2009 12:31 PM CDT reply actions
Just because the national media says it doesn't make it so.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Nope, only if this guy does.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Sep 29, 2009 3:27 PM CDT up reply actions
The Pirates were a powerhouse team
And they also had a big thing going in the late 70s with the “We Are Family” routine. Willie Stargell was larger-than-life.
You also forget that the Pirates were a power team in the late 80s/early 90s and were just a bad break (or a timely Bonds hit) away from going to the World Series instead of the Braves a couple of times.
As I’ve said a million times, we have chosen the team we root for. That is going to mean a lot of wise-ass remarks. I ignore it most of the time.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Steelers and Penguins; Pirates Drought
The Pirates really look bad in comparison to the Steelers and Penguins. Those two teams are reigning champions. In Pittsburgh, you’ve got high school seniors who were barely born when the Pirates last had a winning season. That was back before the World Wide Web got really cranking.
Although I’m not a mathematician, I can figure out 1979 was 30 years ago, when the Pirates last won a World Series. I don’t think young fans much care about what happened 30 years ago. The Pirates are going to have a devil of a time regaining a fan base.
"The big possums walk late." - Harry Caray
Won tonight vs. the Pirates. Need 4 out of the next 6 now!
"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
