Ozzie And Dansby

msstate7 said:
If you're the luckiest team 3 years in a row, it's probably more than luck
Click to expand...

The big achievement is being good enough over 486 games to reach the playoffs thrice consecutively. The smaller achievement, it seems to me, is being good-plus-lucky enough over 33-60 games—but it definitely starts getting much closer to a normative sample.
 
There’s a reason I used 3 in the comparison as opposed to the 5 number that [MENTION=1811]msstate7[/MENTION] facetiously put out there. Obviously, winning 5 straight WS would be insane in this day and age. But I believe 3 consecutive WS and 14 straight division titles are pretty comparable.
 
how often has a baseball team won 14 straight division titles?

how often has a team won 3 straight world series?

the prosecution rests its case
 
CyYoung31 said:
There’s a reason I used 3 in the comparison as opposed to the 5 number that [MENTION=1811]msstate7[/MENTION] facetiously put out there. Obviously, winning 5 straight WS would be insane in this day and age. But I believe 3 consecutive WS and 14 straight division titles are pretty comparable.
Click to expand...

Agreed—I do think it’s where the comparison starts to get interesting.

But, for perspective: being the best of a five-team division over fourteen seasons is a 2268-game sample (though obviously, for the Braves, the strike and divisional realignment means the sample and its stakes are slightly different). Meanwhile, competing in fourteen straight postseasons (under current postseason format) is still only between ~0.9-1.7 seasons worth of a sample.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
The question was most impressive not more statistically likely. Defense rest it’s case.
Click to expand...

oh I understand...there are some things like losing a record number of games that are statistically unlikely but not impressive

but the question was comparing two things that involve excellence...and the one that is more rare statistically SHOULD be considered more impressive

nothing further your honor
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
oh I understand...there are some things like losing a record number of games that are statistically unlikely but not impressive

but the question was comparing two things that involve excellence...and the one that is more impressive SHOULD be the one that is more difficult to accomplish

nothing further your honor
Click to expand...

Then I motion to throw out data of historical records. Saying look how many times team won 3 straight WS vs 14 division titles is not comparable because the divisions were split in 94 and thus making it easier to win a division title. In fact the Braves streak would have ended after only 9 titles if all things stayed the same. Because the Giants has the better record in 2000.

It is clear winning a division of 5 teams is much less impressive. And although 14 has never been matched there also has not been the historical opportunity given to reach such feats.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
Then I motion to throw out data of historical records. Saying look how many times team won 3 straight WS vs 14 division titles is not comparable because the divisions were split in 94 and thus making it easier to win a division title. In fact the Braves streak would have ended after only 9 titles if all things stayed the same. Because the Giants has the better record in 2000.

It is clear winning a division of 5 teams is much less impressive. And although 14 has never been matched there also has not been the historical opportunity given to reach such feats.
Click to expand...


So prior to the Braves getting 14, the previous record was 5.

So even if you want to not count the last 5 division titles for ... reasons .... the Braves still shattered the prior record with the 9 you feel comfortable crediting them with.

As for it being easier than it used to be, the longest postseason appearance streak since the Braves/Yankees streaks ended is the Dodgers current 6 year streak (which happens to be 6 Division Titles as well).

No one else has gotten more than 5 consecutive postseasons.

So the Braves success remains singular.

In contrast, four teams have won three consecutive World Series.

If you asked me which one I would rather have, I'd take the titles. If you asked me which was harder to do, no question I'd pick the divisions.
 
Southcack77 said:
So prior to the Braves getting 14, the previous record was 5.

So even if you want to not count the last 5 division titles for ... reasons .... the Braves still shattered the prior record with the 9 you feel comfortable crediting them with.

As for it being easier than it used to be, the longest postseason appearance streak since the Braves/Yankees streaks ended is the Dodgers current 6 year streak (which happens to be 6 Division Titles as well).

No one else has gotten more than 5 consecutive postseasons.

So the Braves success remains singular.

In contrast, four teams have won three consecutive World Series.

If you asked me which one I would rather have, I'd take the titles. If you asked me which was harder to do, no question I'd pick the divisions.
Click to expand...

thank you counselor
 
CyYoung31 said:
There’s a reason I used 3 in the comparison as opposed to the 5 number that [MENTION=1811]msstate7[/MENTION] facetiously put out there. Obviously, winning 5 straight WS would be insane in this day and age. But I believe 3 consecutive WS and 14 straight division titles are pretty comparable.
Click to expand...

Much rather win 3 straight. Shoot I'd trade the next 10 years if we could win it all this year.
 
I'm sure this is a make or break year for Ozzie. I could see the organization making him an exclusively RHH if he has a second half nosedive like last season.
 
Here is a question, would you rather make the playoffs and have a competitive team for 10 years straight with only a 5% chance of winning the World Series or have one year with a 95% chance of winning the World Series, but its guaranteed that you'll be terrible for the next 9 years.

I like scruples questions like these lol
 
BeanieAntics said:
Here is a question, would you rather make the playoffs and have a competitive team for 10 years straight with only a 5% chance of winning the World Series or have one year with a 95% chance of winning the World Series, but its guaranteed that you'll be terrible for the next 9 years.

I like scruples questions like these lol
Click to expand...

This is basically would rather be the 90s Braves or have the Marlins 2 titles.

Easy call. Braves. If you can find a Marlins fan who is honest, they'd probably agree.
 
Southcack77 said:
This is basically would rather be the 90s Braves or have the Marlins 2 titles.

Easy call. Braves. If you can find a Marlins fan who is honest, they'd probably agree.
Click to expand...

Yup. Easy call for me too between Marlins and Braves over that period.

Plus I think the way the team is currently set up, we can maximize our chances for winning a world series (or multiple WS for that matter) by trying to keep that window open as long as possible. The rebuild (as much through luck as design) has gone about as well as could be hoped for. You have players willing to take below market deals to play for the Braves. We just have to trust the process (which will include some moves to shore up the pen this mid-season).
 
Last edited:
BeanieAntics said:
Here is a question, would you rather make the playoffs and have a competitive team for 10 years straight with only a 5% chance of winning the World Series or have one year with a 95% chance of winning the World Series, but its guaranteed that you'll be terrible for the next 9 years.

I like scruples questions like these lol
Click to expand...

10 years of playoffs with a chance to win it all every year, no question. I consider sustainability the ultimate measure of success.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top