http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2001/1101/1271980.html It's nice to know that we're bringing the winnning tradition of the Boston Red Sox to Houston
Let's see: Total World Series Appearances by the Red Sox since 1962: 3 (all went 7 games) Total World Series Appearances by the Astros since 1962: none ENOUGH SAID!!
Total World Series WINS for the Boston Red Sox since 1962: Zero Total World Series WINS for the Houston Astros since 1962: Zero Sounds pretty even to me... Second place is nothing but the first loser...
Ah, how typical of today's society. So, just because you got to the World Series and didn't win it makes you a loser?? So, last year, in your opinion, the Mets were just as good as the Devil Rays? Remember the Devil Rays didn't make it to the World Series while the Mets lost. Yea, the Mets were really a big loser, one like the Devil Rays last year. Rolleyes:
What do you call somebody that loses in the world series....the winner? The fact is, you can talk about winning percentages and playoff appearances and all that crap, but the bottom line of a team's overall success is measured in one area....championships...Now, did I say that the Astros were a more successful franchise than the Red Sox? No, you're the one that started making all these comparisons (Lord only know how you managed to drag the Mets and the D-Rays into this)...I was just pointing out that Boston has a losing tradition... They LOST to the Mets in '86 They LOST to the Reds in '75 They LOST to the Cardinals in '67 Notice a pattern here, Manny? I never said that the Astros had a bigger winning tradition than Boston...Hell, we're the oldest Major League club that HASN'T been to the World Series. That won't change under Jimy Williams, I can tell you that now... Maybe you're just a bitter Red Sox fan? Are there any Red Sox fans that AREN'T bitter?
When managers like Dierker, who have lots of wins but no postseason success, get fired, it's usually done as a stop gap to please the fans. Drayton was so insistent on getting someone with Major League experience because he felt a manager like that was best for the team he had, a good team that flames out in important games. He didn't want another manager that had to learn how to manage "on the job", like Dierker and Collins, who both had no previous managing experience. The truth is, until we get at least one more decent left handed bat, stronger infield defense, and more consistent middle relief, it's going to be the same story again, 95 wins and a first round exit. I give this current Astros squad two years. If there's no postseason success, then Williams will get fired and the lineup will get a major overhaul...
I find it humorous that you want to slam the Red Sox when the Astros haven't even made it to a World Series. How many playoff series have they lost in a row, A-Train? 4 or 5? I don't want to get into a huge debate on which team is the bigger "loser", but I find it incredulous that you would think the Red Sox are losers when they have reached more World Series in the last 40 years compared to other teams. It would be different for you to say this if you were a Yankees fan, but being an Astros fan, I really don't think that you can say anything about a franchise being a "loser".
I see what you're saying....There was probably no reason for me to mention the Red Sox, anyways...Their past misfortunes really don't have much to do with how well Jimy Williams manages. I guess I would have preferred Felipe Alou and the winning tradition of the Montreal Expos. peace...