Beware the year of the Ox
At various times over the past 6 months I've tried to get some perspective on how terrible/painful the 2009 season was. Now that the year is coming to an end I was contemplating doing a story on this but given other obligations I simply don't have the time. So instead I am going to ask you all for your thoughts on the topic. Rather than give you my list of reasons why I think 2009 was the worst Cleveland Indians baseball year in my lifetime (1979-present), I'm going to simply post the question and elicit feedback. I'll add some of my thoughts later in the comments.
I should add, however, that I don't mean this to be a "woe is me, the life of a Cleveland fan is never-ending hardship, suffering and tragedy, blah blah blah...." kind of post. I just am generally curious about how bad this year was. For those who disagree, feel free to suggest alternative years (there are a few that stick out in my head as being obvious contenders).
Goodbye (and good riddance) 2009, hello 2010!
66 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Are we talking baseball wise or in general? If we mean just baseball I can see that, otherwise Olin and Crews has to take precedent.
We’ll stick to the baseball world, but that includes all things baseball-related. I was definitely thinking of the Lake Nellie incident with Olin and Crews. And while there was certainly nothing in 2009 that compares with the pure tragedy of that incident, 1993 was still a season with a lot of optimism. Jacobs Field was well under construction. Carlos Baerga (age 24), Albert Belle (26) and Kenny Lofton (26) all emerged as young stars that season.
Well, we did finally get rid of Wedge.
"I'm a baseball lifer. It's what I do." —Manny Acta
by westbrook on Dec 29, 2009 2:03 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
In all seriousness, I’m happy about that not because I deeply believed Wedge was the problem, but because Dolan more or less publicly ordered his front office to throw the fans a bone. Strange though it may be to advocate for more active ownership, I can’t shake the feeling that the whole front office needed put in its place. I admit that I might be projecting my own narrative onto history here, but who cares, it made me feel better about myself.
by fleerdon on Dec 29, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions
Scratch that, I was thinking 1987. When there was actual hope. 1985 had very little hope. And Jerry Willard.
Wait 'til next millennium!
I’ll second 1987. I was in Goodyear this year (watched Kerry Wood K Bradley and saw Fausto, Pavon & Lee look solid only to watch all of them start off bad in the regular) with high expectations, but nothing beats the optimism I held as a 12 year-old going into the 87 season. We were due!
No, not you. Your helmet!
by PatBordersHelmet on Dec 29, 2009 5:30 PM EST up reply actions
It’s hard to find any season worse than the mid-80s. Remember that we had to watch the games at Municipal Stadium or on Channel 43 with Bruce Drennan providing color commentary. The team was not at all competitive in the Eastern Division as it was owned by NY, Bos, and Det. We were out of contention by May 1st. In 2009, at least we felt we had a chance heading in to Memorial Day. We were sooo excited to trade for Gorman Thomas fer cryin’ out loud. Given that we play in the Central and have seen how quickly the team can turn around it’s fortunes, I’d say 2009 was not so bad as a fan. And the team seemed to pick up a lot of solid pieces for a bright future.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Dec 29, 2009 3:07 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Lots of good points, Spidey. Here is what is different. Realization. A 2 × 4 hitting you aside the head. We had lousy ownership and management then. Now, we have good ownership (rational ownership), and what we believe(d) was the GM that could overcome the financial inequity that is MLB by outsmarting everyone. Well, a few big injuries, some lousy bullpens, and here we are. So I think this hurts worse (and I’m one of the old guard). I think we have a very good GM who has had some bad luck that you can’t overcome in this unbalanced economic environment. High expectations with the inability to adjust financially makes this worse than the mid-80’s, including 1987, which I never really bought into.
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Dec 29, 2009 8:14 PM EST up reply actions
NYY didn’t win anything in the mid- or late-’80s.
by JulioBernazard on Dec 29, 2009 11:49 PM EST up reply actions
I am opposed to the title of this post.
And the mid-80s were worse in almost every way. Except for the uniforms, which I liked.
5 words: “Warm cup of spit night”
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Dec 29, 2009 3:13 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Most.BoringAwesome. Uniforms. Ever
fixed.
Welcome back, Sandy! ATALECG...
by USSChoo on Dec 31, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Love the blue tops
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Dec 31, 2009 1:33 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t mind the color scheme, just the font’s pretty blase and the block C is a little too ‘safe’ for me. My ideal unis would be a current/1970s hybrid. (Use the 70s typeface and crazy greek C with the button-up design of today.)
I've really got to change my signature.
All the reasons you don’t like it are the reasons for which I like it… and I hate the 70’s style you describe. We’re just opposites on this one.
Welcome back, Sandy! ATALECG...
Either way, I think we can all agree it’s time to retire the cursive 90s unis, right?
No, not you. Your helmet!
by PatBordersHelmet on Jan 2, 2010 12:45 PM EST up reply actions
I like them, but would like them more if they were closer to the 1948 version.
I've really got to change my signature.
Less emphasis on that bloated script “I” would be welcome
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Jan 4, 2010 10:46 AM EST up reply actions
Not saying they’re bad uni’s, but this team has a history of changing styles as era’s turn.
Plus, I’m obsessed with baseball uniforms, so I guess I enjoy uniform changes when they’re bad (Script “I” hat, I’m looking at you) and when they look great (the current weekend alts with red block “C”.)
No, not you. Your helmet!
by PatBordersHelmet on Jan 4, 2010 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
I would be very behind a whole uni-lineup modeled in the vein those alternates.
Welcome back, Sandy! ATALECG...
That site is crazy. They take it a bit too far with their stances on things that are completely arbitrary—like what color uniforms certain football teams are matching up against this week and what that means for civilization, or conspiracy theories about who was missing a tiny Reebok symbol on the left pant-leg of their warm-up before the start of last night’s Raptors-Hawks game.
Additionally, I e-mailed them about a year ago on a subject and they posted my text, but totally rewrote my e-mail and put it in quotes. They did the same thing to a friend of mine who had written in on the same subject. They didn’t misrepresent what either of us said, but c’mon, quotes are quotes and I can’t hang with people who disrespect the proper use of punctuation yet obsess about the apostrophe on the Orioles hat being upside-down.
No, not you. Your helmet!
by PatBordersHelmet on Jan 5, 2010 5:30 PM EST up reply actions
I do, but Lukas can be a condescending snot from time to time. The one thing I could do less with is the niche obsessed with player footwear.
I’ve always liked doing uni re-designs (time willing).
I've really got to change my signature.
I once sent in a helmet redesign for the Cleveland Browns when I was 10. Mailed it straight to Bill Bellichek. Got a letter back and everything, but I’ll be damned if I know what happened to it.
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
To me, it’s a question of whether you’re more emotionally soured by dashed hopes or by imperturbable hopelessness. Argentina, 1951; or USSR, 1982? Though, still, as Spidey alludes to upthread, even if you’re beset with glumness over the current state of affairs, you’ve got a pretty ballpark to visit and likable young players to watch and the (somewhat) comforting sense that the team is operated by grown-ups. We never had to stomach trading three of our best four players in the ‘80s, but then we didn’t have that kind of talent on the roster to begin with. So: better to have loved and lost…?
You’re also going to fight the generation gap in your effort to get a straight answer to this one. By the time I was old enough to care about baseball with any comprehension, the Indians were worth caring about. I remember Municipal well enough, but not a bit of the actual baseball that was played there.
by fleerdon on Dec 29, 2009 4:09 PM EST reply actions
It’s never better to have loved and lost but, even saying that, I’d have to say 1987 was the worst. 1985 at least brought me a new brother and, with him, a toy car he somehow purchased me while gestating. Thinking that I had a miracle working younger sibling carried me through a bad year.
By 1987 I realized that my dad had actually purchased the toy car and claimed that Joel did. Now hardened to the world I was able to more effectively vent my five year old spleen on Chris Bando. That ’87 team is just an abomination.
by Brad D on Dec 29, 2009 7:21 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
For me, I would have to say 1994 was the worst. I waited my entire life to see the Tribe in the playoffs and in the Series. Then, whammo. Strike. Over. How amazing would that Cleveland/Montreal WS have been? The season was great until the abrupt and unfortunate stoppage.
Did Hammy just say "A two-run jack off the wall!"?
by jeff kent's moustache HOF on Dec 29, 2009 6:35 PM EST reply actions
Steve’s Hot Lunch!
No, not you. Your helmet!
by PatBordersHelmet on Dec 29, 2009 8:26 PM EST up reply actions
Good point. 1994 should be on the list of great disappointments. That season is like the Bumpuses dogs snatching tHe Christmas turkey. At least we still had 1995 to recover, though MLB didn’t show all the games in all markets. I drove for hours trying to find a bar showing the Seattle game!
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..." C. Darwin
by Spidey on Dec 29, 2009 8:39 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
1994 also comes to mind. But again, it was painful because we were playing great baseball before the strike. At least for me, the awesomeness of 1995 also retroactively made 1994 not as bad.
But IN 1994, it WAS like the Bumpass Hounds. And I felt exactly like Old Man Parker, staring at the remnants of of MY christmas turkey. My golden, and perfectly cooked…..I’m gonna cry.
Fehr Hounds! Fehrs! Fehrs!
Did Hammy just say "A two run jack-off the wall!"?
by jeff kent's moustache HOF on Dec 29, 2009 8:54 PM EST up reply actions
admitted excessive use of italics.
Did Hammy just say "A two run jack-off the wall!"?
by jeff kent's moustache HOF on Dec 29, 2009 8:56 PM EST reply actions
reply fail
No, not you. Your helmet!
by PatBordersHelmet on Dec 30, 2009 2:00 AM EST up reply actions
For me it might be Aught-Eight. The Tribe had just come off a great 2007 campaign in which they were tied for the best record in baseball, had two aces and the majority of the ALCS roster returning… and then crudded up the bed something fierce. Early. And often.
I find dashed hopes much harder than consistent futility (which is why I should be alright for the next two years or so).
by JulioBernazard on Dec 29, 2009 11:53 PM EST reply actions
Werd. Expectations crashed hard in ’08; I had no such dreams at the start of ’09.
(My sights are set even lower for 2010.)
by JulioBernazard on Jan 4, 2010 11:09 AM EST up reply actions
Most fans around here, I think, felt that 2008 looked a lot like 2006 — just a blip where a few misfortunes overtook a fundamentally good team. Our pre-2009 moves looked impressive on paper; we looked better at RF, 3B, 2B, and 1B-C at the at the start of 2009 than we had a year earlier, and the bullpen looked headed for a solid improvement and possibly a massive upswing.
I couldn’t agree with this more.
Though I look right at home, I still feel like an exile
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Jan 4, 2010 8:56 PM EST up reply actions
The closer generally is considered part of the bullpen.
by Jay on Jan 5, 2010 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This year was the worst for me. Coming into my fandom in the early 80’s made all the bad years then seem normal, and yes ‘87 really did stink. The run from the mid 90’s until ‘07 were either good years or there seemed to be a plan and some hope. Watching the team flounder, having the manager fired and seeing weak spots in the front office have not been fun and have reminded me of the ghosts of the ’80s. And there really haven’t been any silver linings this season either. No strong finishes, no big moves, etc. This year would have fit in well with the ’80s years.
A few low lights from 2009 for me..
The shadow of CC’s signing with the Yankees and his opening press conference still lingering in my head on January 1st
Trading not one, but two of the team’s best players, both on team-friendly contracts not just for 2009 but also for 2010
Seeing the two previous AL Cy Young winners, both earning the award with the Tribe, pitching against each other in game 1 of the World Series….for different teams. Game 1 – not some random middle game shuffle, but headlining the World Series.
Grady getting hurt
Fausto continuing to shoot poorly-aimed sinking fastballs into my heart
June 15-21
A 1-7 start out of the gate, starting the whole season in a funk
Jhonny Peralta following Ryan Garko’s 2008 lead and totally muffing his age-27 season
The team not committing to Peralta at 3B from the start of the season
The front office and coaching staff essentially taking a cross-your-fingers-and-hope-for-the-best approach during the critical period of May and early June
Andy Marte finally showing some ability to hit…just in time to not be part of the 2010 team
Not trading Kelly Shoppach prior to the season
Top pitching prospect David Huff giving a less than stellar rookie campaign
The bullpen
71 innings from Tomo Ohka…71
Hafner’s tease of a season (OPS+ by month: 137, 191, 114, 75, 114)
The Yankees winning the World Series…and then having (what looks like) a fantastic November and December
An awesome 7-25 end of the season (here we come 2010!)
Going 4-14 against Detroit
These are just some of the reasons 2009 was the worst for me. And again, a big part of why this was so much worse than anything in the 80s for me is that I had real, and not unrealistic, expectations that this team would be good. And unlike the 90s, this team fundamentally was not good and there isn’t much of a “just wait till next year” attitude at the moment (just wait till 2011 or 2012 doesn’t quite cut it).
Catharthis…
by APV on Dec 31, 2009 12:09 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
A list of good things would be shorter:
S.S. Choo continues to hit.
Hafner’s OPS (not number of PAs).
The arrival of LaPorta, Brantley, Masterson and Marson.
Chris Perez and Tony Sipp.
Carl Pavano good enough to trade (for Yohan Pino).
Wedge sent packing.
All and all pretty thread bare list.
2007 was great – just shy of ’97 and ’95 for me. And if you squint just right you might excuse 2008 as just an off year.
But 2009 was more like nostalgia for me. Once again my Tribe was a truly awful team. So bad in fact that they finished in a dead heat for last in a – with no apologies to the oft-maligned NL West – bad division.
Without getting too negative, here are some other low lights:
§ The hardest throwing young pitcher we’ve had in quite awhile blows up in typical Indians fashion after under going what was probably an ill-advised surgical procedure.
§ The utter lack of major league ready talent at the AAA level to help get us outta this morass in 2010. Shapiro et al’s Achilles heel – the inability to identify amateur baseball talent – is once more over-exposed.
§ We deal two guys who are arguably the club’s best ever at their positions for some guys we pray might contribute in 2011 or 12. I get the why, but it still hurts
§ The disparity between the haves – Red Sox, Dodgers, and the You-Know-Who’s – and my guys, once again widens.
So my once ever-optimistic 90s view of the Indians prospects is back into late 80s mode: hoping for the best but expecting the worst. Seems like old times.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
The French have a word for that: Nostalgie de la boue.
…two guys who are arguably the club’s best ever at their positions…
I get that Victor might be the best ever at catcher (Duke Sims?), but are you arguing that Clifton is the best lefthanded starter the Indians have ever had?
Cliff’s achievements make him the third-best Indians lefty starter of the past 50 years.
by Jay on Jan 1, 2010 1:31 AM EST up reply actions
I’m gonna assume that you made that evaluation based solely on statistics. I’m also gonna assume that the other two lefties are Cazzi Culone and Sudden Sam.
Let’s look at it from a different angle. Let’s say you can pick one of three in their prime to help you win a pennant. Which one would you choose? I imagine you’d go with Culone. But you hafta admit it’s close – real close – with Cliff no worse than a very, very close third. Now let’s say you can choose one of the three to help you win the World Series. Which one of these three guys to you want to start Games 1, 4 and 7? Probably not Sam since he’ll be hung over for at least two of the three. And certainly not that pin-striped choke artist. There’s only one choice here isn’t there?
As an aside, which one of these guys do you want at bat in the fifth with two outs of a 0-0 Game 7? I could see you choosing Tubby, but really, who do you thinks got the stones to choke up and stroke a soft liner to left? Better yet, who do you want running at second base with two outs in the fifth? Absolutely no discussion here is there?
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
I support Ryan’s ranking of the seasons in the Indians Annual. Lee in his best season was better than C.C. or S.S. in their best seasons. The close call is nothing by Sabathia, but rather McDowell in 1965, at age 22. He pitched 70 more innings and got 155 more strikeouts, which are big differences. But Lee 2008 has the edge in ERA+ and allowed many fewer baserunners despite pitching in a much more hitter-friendly era.
So Lee wins the single-season contest, but he loses under any other scope of analysis —three seasons, five seasons, whole career. His career ERA+ is 109 — 108 as an AL pitcher and Indian — and in those terms, he doesn’t remotely compare to either of the other two lefties.
by Jay on Jan 1, 2010 3:56 PM EST up reply actions
I would say that 2009 was a close second to 2008. However, I watched more games in 2008.
My issues with the season were as follows:
-Sizemore’s struggles and injuries
-Losing Victor and Cliff a year before their contracts due to “economic hardship”
-The rest of division’s continued mediocrity and not being able to capitalize on this
-Carmona’s not returning to form
-Westbrook not being able to return
-Hafner not being able play everyday
-We finally spend significant money on the bullpen and it gets worse
-Wedge not playing Laporta more
-Watching Lee and Sabathia duel in the world series
I think of 2008 and 2009 this way (quoting Hunter S Thompson)
“And that, I think, was the handle – that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of old and evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn’t need that. Our energy would simply prevail. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave. So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look west, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high-water mark – that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.”
Baseball fans are junkies, and their heroin is the statistic. - Robert S. Wieder

by 

















