The Forgotten Ballparks

When you think of the classic ballparks in baseball, you think of Chicago's Wrigley Field, and Boston's Fenway Park. And while both parks, I'm sure, are great, we often seem to forget the other classic parks. Other than the fine people from Michigan, I doubt anyone really remembers Tigers' Stadium up in Detroit, or even the Baseball Palace of the World on the south side of Chicago, Comiskey Park.

But its deeper than that. Other than local fans, a lot of great old ballparks have been forgotten. With old timers disappearing by the years, pretty soon there won't be anyone live that will remember the Polo Grounds, or Forbes Field. I'm here to help bring these stadiums back to life, in one aspect, if you will.

Griffith Stadium - Washington, D.C.

If you note the in-cave in center field, that was due to a woman who wouldn't sell her house, so the ballpark was built around it.

Ebbets Field - Brooklyn, NY

Connie Mack Stadium - Philadelphia, PA

Sportsman Park - St. Louis, MO

Comiskey Park - Chicago, IL

Crosley Field - Cincinnati, OH

Tigers Stadium - Detroit, MI

Polo Grounds - New York, NY

(Yes, its in 3D, but colour pictures that weren't horrible are a rare find)

Why 2005 Meant More to Chicago Than You Probably Realize

There have been a lot of championship droughts in baseball. As mentioned in an earlier post, the Philadelphia Phillies went almost 100 years before they ever won a World Series. The Cleveland Indians haven't won a World Series since 1948, the Boston Red Sox went 86 years before they won a World Series. And Chicago, the nations third largest city, went 88 years without winning a World Series.

While everyone knows the curse the Bambino, and the curse of the Billy Goat, no one ever really seemed to care, or acknowledge, the curse of the Black Sox. The Black Sox, of course, is in reference to the acquisition of eight players from the Chicago White Sox throwing the World Series against the Cincinnati Reds in 1919. Throwing a World Series seems way more damning than not letting in a goat, trading away a player, or having a statue of William Penn on a building (I see you, Philadelphia).

But, back to business; the White Sox World Series winner in 2005 was the first World Series title in Chicago since 1917, when the White Sox defeated the New York Giants. As amazing at that sounds, there is more to it that makes it all the sadder, assuming you're sympathetic towards Chicago teams. The White Sox '05 pennant was the first pennant in Chicago since 1959. That's right, a Chicago team hadn't even been to a World Series in 46 years. The White Sox '59 pennant was the first pennant for the White Sox since 1919. A forty year drought. 1959 was also the first Chicago pennant since the Cubs lost to the Detroit Tigers in 1945.

Assuming you were alive at the turn of the 20th century, the great droughts may have been worse than those born in the 1960s, or 1970s. Fans born post of the Go-Go Sox had to deal with 40 years of not winning, but remember, the two teams were fairly dominate teams in the early goings. The Cubs would win the NL pennant in 1906, 1907, 1908, 1910, 1918, 1929, 1932, 1935, 1938, and 1945. And the White Sox would win the pennant in the AL in 1901 (no World Series yet, however), 1906, 1917, and 1919. The two teams met in 1906, the "hitless wonders" beat the Cubs in six games. 1917, 1918, and 1919 would see a Chicago team in three consecutive seasons.

As you creep towards the end of the century, it sort of gets better. The White Sox would win the American League Western Division in 1983. Chicago's first playoff team since the Go-Go Sox in 1959. 24 years, but its better than 40 I suppose. The Cubs would win the National League East in 1984, their first playoff appearance in 39 years. Ron Santo, Ernie Banks, Billy Williams, Ferguson Jenkins, Luke Appling, Ted Lyons, never got to play in the World Series. Granted, winning a championship doesn't make, or break, your reputation in sports (or at least, it shouldn't).

All in all, the two teams really can't blame it on a curse. As much as the 1969 black cat or the 2003 Bartman incident, the Cubs just choked. Its no different the White Sox choking away the last two weeks of the 2012 season, or the Sox fading in 2003 down the stretch. It happens. You never heard White Sox fans crying woe, during their drought like you did with Cubs, and Red Sox fans.

No curse, just mostly bad teams. Since 1945, the Cubs are 8th in offensive WAR (the only teams worse are all the NL expansion teams, and the Brewers, and they're only worse because of their shorter tenure), since 1945, the Cubs are last tied for last in wRC+. On the pitching end, the Cubs are actually 3rd since 1945 in WAR, which is pretty incredible. But while they're 9th in ERA-, they're 11th in xFIP-. So, over the past 68 seasons, to summarize, the Cubs have pitched well, but haven't scored a lot of runs to back it up. Pitching wins championships, but you lose games when you don't drive in runs.

As for the White Sox, from 1920-2004,  the White Sox were 6th in offensive WAR, but 14th in wRC+ (only the Devil Rays were worse, and from their start in 1998-2004 they never had a winning season) On pitching, from 1920-2004 the White Sox were 5th WAR, and 8th in xFIP- (100, which is average). Sox, the Sox were pretty bad at hitting, and average-ish on pitching. So, as bad as we thought the Cubs have been since 1949, the Sox were worse from 1920-2004.

In my opinion, I blame the two ballparks the teams have called home most of their existences for their problems.

When Comiskey Park was built in 1910, it was the heart of the deadball era, and the dimensions of the Baseball Palace of the World, were huge. In fact, pitcher Ed Walsch, help design the ballpark. When Comiskey Park opened in 1910, the foul poles were '360 feet, the power allies were '382 feet, dead center was '420. This would cause a huge black hole for offensiveness. Beltin' Bill Melton would be the first White Sox 30+ single season home run hitter in 1970 with 33. Someone wouldn't crank 40+ until Frank Thomas would do it in 1993.

For the Cubs, Wrigley Field is hard to build a team around. When the wind blows out, Wrigley is a bandbox, when the wind blows in, its a pitchers haven. The old offset is that you build a team for your ballpark, but the Cubs can't even do that because of where they play. And as mentioned in an earlier post, the Cubs can't leave Wrigley Field because its the only thing that keeps them relevant in a town that would treat them them no different than the White Sox if they didn't have Wrigley.  Face it, Chicago isn't a baseball town. It isn't that the people don't like baseball, but the Bears, Bulls, and now the Blackhawks are way more popular.

When the White Sox won it all in 2005, it was a huge burden lifted off of Chicago's shoulders (and Chicago is known as the city with big shoulders, so you know it must have been something). When Commisioner Bug Selig gave the trophy to Jerry Reinsdorf, JR said: "this is for all the fans in Chicago, south side, north side, west side, this is for you." You know he meant it too, and he should. For Chicago to go 88 years without winning is kind of a big deal. Most Cubs fans wouldn't dare admit it, but I bet that most of them were secretly rooting for the Sox to win it. Yeah, there would be some razzing, that's to be expected, but for the better of the city, it would have been worth it.

 Given the White Sox shenanigans since 2005, I think most of the south side faithful are grateful for it. It was a great accomplishment for Chicago, regardless of your allegiance.

Why the Cubs Can Never Leave Wrigley Field

When you think of the Chicago Cubs, one of baseball's oldest franchises, you are instantly swallowed by memories and images of Harry Carey,  seventh inning stretches, day games in the warm summer sun, historic Wrigley Field and its assets such as Ivy, and a hand operated scoreboard, and just having a good time. There is nothing wrong with that, but what you also think of is the "curse of the billy goat", the 1969 Cubs' late season collapse against the miracle Mets, Steve Bartman and 1908. That, however, is something wrong.

The former is the reason why the Chicago Cubs can never leave Wrigley Field. Wrigley Field is the Cubs' greatest asset. People from all over the world come to catch a ballgame there. If the Cubs didn't play at Wrigley Field, the Cubs would have nothing to sell.

Lets go back in time for a bit. During the 1960s and 1970s teams starting leaving their old ballparks and started moving into the "cookie cutter" stadiums. As was the case in Washington, Atlanta, Houston, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, and Minneapolis. This lead to the end of the jewel box stadiums such as Forbes Field, Crosley Field, Shibe Park, Sportsman's Park, and League Park. This left Comiskey Park, Fenway Park, Tiger Stadium, and Wrigley Field, and with the lone exception of Kauffman Stadium opening up in 1973, as the only baseball only park until New Comiskey Park was christened in 1991.

Lets say that the NFL's Chicago Bears, and the Chicago Cubs both decided to leave Wrigley Field in 1970, and instead of the Bears moving to Soldier Field, the two teams teamed up and built a cookie cutter stadium somewhere in town. Fast forward a bit to opening day 1984, the Cubs haven't been to a playoff game since 1945, since 1972 the only non-losing season the Cubs had was in 1977 and that's with a .500 record. The collapse of 1969 is still a close memory, and finally: all the old Cubs' greats are long retired; Ernie Banks, Ron Santo, Billy Williams, and Don Kessinger. But instead of beautiful Wrigley Field, the Cubs play at a stadium similar to Veterans park, or Three Rivers. With all due respect, the Cubs wouldn't draw anyone on those premises.

But, its because of the Tribune Company, and WGN, that allowed the Cubs to seize control of the city. When WGN became a superstation in 1984, Harry Carey's seventh inning stretches, day ballgames, and the spin machine of Wrigley Field the Cubs became a huge attraction. From 1984-1993 the Cubs drew 16,937,216 which averages to about 1,693,721 a season. But, from 1974-1983 the Cubs only drew 12, 191,554 which averages about 1,219,155 a season. In 1981 the Cubs only drew 565,637. But as the team slowly started to get better in 1982, and 1983, and with the emergence of WGN as a Superstaion the Cubs would be able to become the money machine they are.

For most of the rest of the 1980s and 1990s the Cubs would continue to flirt with .500, but usually were below it posting losing seasons in 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1997, and 1999. Attendance was still up though. 

Tom Ricketts, the current owner of the Cubs, knows that he cannot leave Wrigleyville. A move to the suburbs would be disastrous. A ballpark in the nothern burbs, or even a new park downtown wouldn't have the appeal that Wrigley has. Sure, its a Chicago ballpark so people would come out, and it would make money, but there would be pressure to win. When people come to your ballpark regardless of the teams appearance, there is zero incentive to win. 

This is a luxury the Cubs have. The crosstown White Sox don't have that, they White Sox know they have to at least try to be competitive to get people to come out the games. White Sox fans get called out for that, but given the two choices. But which is better? Under the radar, potentially good, and reasonable prices (in theory, White Sox ticket prices prior to 2013 were really, really, steep) or root for the lovable losers and dish out a lot of money for tickets?

If the Cubs had been able to seal the deal in 1945, or 2003, then it wouldn't matter honestly. But curse of the billy goat became the Cubs' biggest blessing.

1961: Winners and Losers

For decades baseball was a pretty stagnant thing when it came to its teams. When the National League recognized the American League as an actual Major League in 1901 and then adopted the World Series in 1903, baseball was pretty much a stalwart. From 1903 until 1952 the original 16 teams played in the same cities. In the American League you had the Boston Red Sox, Chicago White Sox, Cleveland Indians, Detroit Tigers, New York Yankees (played as the Baltimore Orioles from 1901-1902), St. Lois Browns (Played as the Milwaukee Brewers in 1901), Philadelphia Athletics, and Washington Senators.

While in the National League you had the Boston Braves, Brooklyn Dodgers, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati Reds, New York Giants, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates, and St. Louis Cardinals. Obviously, teams would move since then. In 1953 the Boston Braves moed to Milwaukee to become the Milwaukee Braves. In 1954 the Browns moved to Baltimore and became the Orioles. In 1955 the Philadelphia A’s moved to Kansas City, and in 1961 the original Washington Senators moved to Minnesota to become the Twins. 

Expansion would happen in 1961 as the American League would get a brand new Washington Senators team (these Senators would eventually moved to Texas in 1971 and become the Rangers), and the California Angels. Fans of these two new teams had to be excited, but their teams would be precedence on whom to model.

So, let us take a look back into the spring of 1961, and evaluate the original 16 MLB franchises and rank them. If you’re wondering if I arbitrarily chose 1961, I did not. I chose it because it would be a fair judgement. The 16 teams had been playing for 60 years in baseball.

  American League Rankings:

1. New York Yankees – 18 World Series titles, 29 AL Pennants 
2. Kansas City/Philadelphia A’s – 5 World Series / 8 AL Pennants 
3. Detroit Tigers – 2 World Series, 7 AL Pennants 
4. Cleveland Indians – 2 World Series, 3 AL Pennants 
5. Boston Red Sox – 5 World Series Titles, 11 AL Pennants 
6. Chicago White Sox – 2 World Series, 5 AL Pennants 
7. Minnesota Twins/Washington Senators – 1 World Series, 3 AL Pennants 
8. Baltimore Orioles/St. Louis Browns – 0 World Series, 1 AL Pennant 

So, looking at this the numbers may seem kind of messed up, let me explain. Despite having 5 World Series titles, the Red Sox are placed 6th due to that whole not winning anything since 1918, which was entering year 44 in 1962. Same with Chicago, they hadn't won a World Series since 1917. Luckily, the saving grace for the disgraced Sox teams was the fact that the Browns/Orioles have never won a World Series until this point, and the Senators hadn't won a World Series since 1924.

 National League Ranking:

1. St. Louis Cardinals – 6 World Series, 9 NL Pennants 
2. San Francisco/New York Giants – 5 World Series, 14 NL Pennants 
3. Pittsburgh Pirates – 3 World Series, 5 NL Pennants 
4. Los Angeles/Brooklyn Dodgers – 2 World Series, 10 NL Pennants 
5. Milwaukee/Boston Braves – 2 World Series, 4 NL Pennants 
6. Cincinnati Reds – 2 World Series, 3 NL Pennants 
7. Chicago Cubs – 2 World Series, 10 NL Pennants 
8. Philadelphia Phillies – 0 World Series, 2 NL Pennants. 

 As with the A’s and Red Sox, I gave the Reds the nod over the Cubs because of that whole 1908 thing (which was entering year 53). But I did put the Cubs over the Phillies because even though it had been 53 years, quantity over quality at that point.

 Looking back it all, its kind of crazy that after 59 years of baseball that two franchises never won it at that point. And that three teams would be in droughts. Meaning that from 1918 through 1960 only 11 teams were winning titles. Looking forward though, things would get better for some. The Red Sox, and White Sox would end their droughts in back to back seasons (2004, and 2005). The Phillies would finally win their first title in 1980. The title-less Orioles would have great success in the 1960s through the early 1980s winning 3 titles (1966, 1970, 1983) and 6 Pennants (1966, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1979, 1983) in a 17 season stretch. In 2010, the San Francisco Giants would win their first World Series since moving to the Bay Area.

For the downers: The Chicago Cubs are still waiting for another World Series title. The Indians have won two pennants since (1995, and 1997) but haven’t won a World Series since 1948. Its too hard to gauge teams now. With expansion happening in 1961, 1962, 1969, 1977, 1993, and 1998. Granted some of these teams have had good seasons in their infancy. Arizona would win a World Series in 2001 after being activated in 1998. And the Marlins would win a World Series in 1997 (and again in 2003) after being activated in 1993.