Amtrak Series

[Guest]

Cliff Lee vs CC Sabathia in game 1.
I'm an Indians fan. How depressing. :angry:

As far as I am concerned, any world championship the Yankees have (or will have) since the '70s is bought, not earned. How can Yankee fans live with themselves? They have a huge unfair advantage in that they can buy the best players from most any other team.

Until the playing field is truly level, the rich, big-market teams' championships are tainted. There is a reason the 4 LCS teams are all from big markets (LA, Philly, NY).

Yankee fans can say they haven't been competitive lately (until recently) and that big $$$ doesn't guarantee a championship. I can say that they have spent their big dollars poorly in the past 7 years (not enough pitching). When the $$$ is spent wisely, they have a huge unfair advantage.

TAINTED I say!

as an equally long-suffering Indians fan who is actually looking forward to a Sabathia-Lee showdown in games 1, 4 and 7, I long for the day the Indians and Pirates...or Reds will play in the Series and fans can take AMTRAK between the cities.....

Hope you are fairly young as it might be the next millenium before any of these small market teams will be in the series let alone the playoffs!Getting rid of young stars you develop in the name of cutting payroll is a sure ticket to last place and low attendance! The Astros are on this track too, you can say what you want about the Yankees, money never hit a homerun or threw a 100mph fastball but it does talk and bs walks!! Yankees in 7, great series coming up! And its being called "The Amtrak Series" which is great! Hope they get in a commercial from this!!!

 

[tp49]

as an equally long-suffering Indians fan who is actually looking forward to a Sabathia-Lee showdown in games 1, 4 and 7, I long for the day the Indians and Pirates...or Reds will play in the Series and fans can take AMTRAK between the cities.....

I'd very much like to see the Pirates be competitive again. Unfortunately for them to do that they need an ownership change. The current ownership group is more interested in pocketing the revenue sharing money then putting a quality product on the field. Stargell and Clemente are turning over in their graves seeing what the Pirates have become.

 

[ExtonFlyer]

Great "Train" coverage of the World Series in the NYTimes today:

Shades of 1950 - Phillies arrive in NYC by Train

Making Tracks from Philadelphia to the Bronx

 

[AAARGH!]

As far as I am concerned, any world championship the Yankees have (or will have) since the '70s is bought, not earned. How can Yankee fans live with themselves? They have a huge unfair advantage in that they can buy the best players from most any other team.
Until the playing field is truly level, the rich, big-market teams' championships are tainted. There is a reason the 4 LCS teams are all from big markets (LA, Philly, NY).

Think what you will of the Yankees but were you complaining when they were spending a lot of money and losing back in the late 80's early 90's (Mel Hall anyone?) Those days were bad for Yankees fans because a number of the players they sent away from their system turned into good players in their own right in their new city (Fred McGriff, Jose Rijo, Doug Drabek, Jay Buhner.) How can I live with myself? Just fine thanks. FWIW Indians fans weren't saying much back in 1997 either when they crushed the Yankees in the playoffs on the way to an AL pennant.

As I said in an earlier post, the Yankees have not always spent their money wisely. But when they do, it is because they have the money that they compete at a high level.

As for 1997, IIRC the Indians were made up of several Indians' farm players, spectacular trades (Kenny Lofton, Sandy Alomar, etc..), and a few well thought out free-agent acquisitions (Eddie Murray?). Dick Jacobs built the farm system up and the results show. We didn't need to say anything in 1997 because we did it the 'honest' way. We earned it.

Of course the Yankees were very good in the late 1990s. But again, it was because of several high-priced free agents as opposed to trades and a strong farm system. Not all of the very good Yankees came from free agency. Several came from the farm system, but the propotion of quality free agent signees was/is much higher because of the money.

We beat them in 1997 because we had a fantastic team. The only difference between the two teams is how the teams were built.

I stand by my prior statements.

 

[DET63]

Does the quality of a city's rail-transit system have correlation to its World Series success?

Just askin'.

 

[AAARGH!]

Does the quality of a city's rail-transit system have correlation to its World Series success?
Just askin'.

That would be an interesting comparison. My guess is yes, as larger cities have better rail-transit systems AND they can afford more (better) free agents.

 

[el Guapo]

As far as I am concerned, any world championship the Yankees have (or will have) since the '70s is bought, not earned. How can Yankee fans live with themselves? They have a huge unfair advantage in that they can buy the best players from most any other team.
Until the playing field is truly level, the rich, big-market teams' championships are tainted. There is a reason the 4 LCS teams are all from big markets (LA, Philly, NY).

Think what you will of the Yankees but were you complaining when they were spending a lot of money and losing back in the late 80's early 90's (Mel Hall anyone?) Those days were bad for Yankees fans because a number of the players they sent away from their system turned into good players in their own right in their new city (Fred McGriff, Jose Rijo, Doug Drabek, Jay Buhner.) How can I live with myself? Just fine thanks. FWIW Indians fans weren't saying much back in 1997 either when they crushed the Yankees in the playoffs on the way to an AL pennant.

As I said in an earlier post, the Yankees have not always spent their money wisely. But when they do, it is because they have the money that they compete at a high level.

As for 1997, IIRC the Indians were made up of several Indians' farm players, spectacular trades (Kenny Lofton, Sandy Alomar, etc..), and a few well thought out free-agent acquisitions (Eddie Murray?). Dick Jacobs built the farm system up and the results show. We didn't need to say anything in 1997 because we did it the 'honest' way. We earned it.

Of course the Yankees were very good in the late 1990s. But again, it was because of several high-priced free agents as opposed to trades and a strong farm system. Not all of the very good Yankees came from free agency. Several came from the farm system, but the propotion of quality free agent signees was/is much higher because of the money.

We beat them in 1997 because we had a fantastic team. The only difference between the two teams is how the teams were built.

I stand by my prior statements.

C'mon. I hate this arguement. You make it sound like Artie Moreno and Frank McCourt share a cardboard box that they're living in under the 101 Freeway. The owners are all very wealthy and are looking to stay very wealthy. The reason other owners don't spend a dime more than they have to is because they don't want to.

The Yankees do exactly what we all wish Amtrak would do and that is to spend more money (wisely) to improve their product.

"We beat them in 1997 because we had a fantastic team. The only difference between the two teams is how the teams were built."

Seriously?

Alrighty then:

1997

Cleveland Indians Orig. team

Roberts 2b PADRES

Vizquel ss MARINERS

Ramirez rf INDIANS

Thome 1b INDIANS

Justice dh BRAVES

Williams 3b GIANTS

Alomar c PADRES

Giles lf INDIANS

Grissom cf EXPOS

Hershiser p DODGERS

Mesa-cl ORIOLES

NY Yankees

Raines dh EXPOS

Jeter ss YANKEES

O'Neill rf REDS

Williams cf YANKEES

Martinez 1b MARINERS

Curtis lf ANGELS

Boggs 3b RED SOX

Girardi c CUBS

Sanchez 2b CUBS

Cone p ROYALS

Rivera p YANKEES

Now. What was that you were saying?

 

[AAARGH!]

C'mon. I hate this arguement. You make it sound like Artie Moreno and Frank McCourt share a cardboard box that they're living in under the 101 Freeway. The owners are all very wealthy and are looking to stay very wealthy. The reason other owners don't spend a dime more than they have to is because they don't want to.
The Yankees do exactly what we all wish Amtrak would do and that is to spend more money (wisely) to improve their product.

"We beat them in 1997 because we had a fantastic team. The only difference between the two teams is how the teams were built."

Seriously?

Alrighty then:

1997

Cleveland Indians Orig. team

Roberts 2b PADRES

Vizquel ss MARINERS

Ramirez rf INDIANS

Thome 1b INDIANS

Justice dh BRAVES

Williams 3b GIANTS

Alomar c PADRES

Giles lf INDIANS

Grissom cf EXPOS

Hershiser p DODGERS

Mesa-cl ORIOLES

NY Yankees

Raines dh EXPOS

Jeter ss YANKEES

O'Neill rf REDS

Williams cf YANKEES

Martinez 1b MARINERS

Curtis lf ANGELS

Boggs 3b RED SOX

Girardi c CUBS

Sanchez 2b CUBS

Cone p ROYALS

Rivera p YANKEES

Now. What was that you were saying?

It's a fun discussion, isn't it? (even if it has gone waaaaaaay off the subject).

But how were those players acquired? I don't know for sure, but my (strong) guess is that the Indians traded for more versus how many were 'bought' via free agency. I bet for the Yankees, it is the opposite of the Indians.

As for the owners, I don't buy that argument. They are businessmen. The more money they make, the more they can spend, and the Yankees make a mint (can you say Yes Network?). Their money is not limitless. I don't know any businessman that will spend $200MM/year when they are only making $50MM (if that). But George can spend it because he is making more than $200MM. You make it sound like all owners are created equally. While other owners may be richer than George, they can't spend nearly as much because it ain't comin' in like it does in New York.

I shouldn't single out the Yankees. LA and most other large market cities are the same way, but not to the same extent. The Yankees are the poster-children of my gripe.

EDIT: Moderators, If this is too far off topic, let me know and I will cease and desist. :blink: This hit a nerve.

 

[el Guapo]

GO PHILLIES!!! We use the minor leagues! Them Damn Yankees use their money! Not the minor leagues! They draft just to trade their players!

Um ... I think it's about equal (to drift off topic...). I count exactly four starting position players, two starting pitchers, and one ace reliever on each team that came up through the farm system:

YANKEES

Posada, Yankees' 24th round draft pick in 1990

Jeter, Yankees' 1st round draft pick in 1992

Cabrera, undrafted, signed by Yankees as an amateur free agent in 2001

Cano, undrafted, signed by Yankees as an amateur free agent in 2001

Pettitte, Yankees' 22nd round draft pick in 1990

Chamberlain, Yankees' 1st round draft pick in 2006

Rivera, undrafted, signed by Yankees as an amateur free agent in 1990

PHILLIES

Ruiz, undrafted, signed by Phillies as an amateur free agent in 1998

Howard, Phillies' 5th round draft pick in 2001

Utley, Phillies' 1st round draft pick in 2000

Rollins, Phillies' 2nd round draft pick in 1996

Hamels, Phillies' 1st round draft pick in 2002

Happ, Phillies' 3rd round draft pick in 2004

Madson, Phillies' 9th round draft pick in 1998

You could argue that among the starters listed here, the Yankees have several more who were undrafted free agents and the Phillies have more who were draft picks, but all except Chamberlain spent years in the Yankees farm system between being signed and debuting in New York, during which they could have burned out just like most draft picks tend to and during which the Yankees spent a lot of effort developing them; they're not in the same class regular free agents who already have proven major league records (like Texiera, Rodriguez, Lee, Martinez, etc).

You mentioned Joba, but don't forget the rest of the bullpen. Hughes, Robertson and Coke all signed with the Yankees and played with them in the minors.

 

[JayPea]

I want the Phillies to repeat as World Champions but admit to not disliking the Yankees as intensely this year as in years past. I guess that's because it was so enjoyable last season to watch the MLB playoffs without the Yankees in it at all and also because Steinbrenner is more or less in the background.

GO PHILLIES!!!!

 

[PetalumaLoco]

It’s not the Amtrak Series – it’s the ‘NJ Transit Series’

 

[Murjax]

It’s not the Amtrak Series – it’s the ‘NJ Transit Series’

It could easily be the SEPTA series too. :lol:

 

[PetalumaLoco]

Actually for me it's the IDGAC series.

 

[tp49]

As far as I am concerned, any world championship the Yankees have (or will have) since the '70s is bought, not earned. How can Yankee fans live with themselves? They have a huge unfair advantage in that they can buy the best players from most any other team.
Until the playing field is truly level, the rich, big-market teams' championships are tainted. There is a reason the 4 LCS teams are all from big markets (LA, Philly, NY).

Think what you will of the Yankees but were you complaining when they were spending a lot of money and losing back in the late 80's early 90's (Mel Hall anyone?) Those days were bad for Yankees fans because a number of the players they sent away from their system turned into good players in their own right in their new city (Fred McGriff, Jose Rijo, Doug Drabek, Jay Buhner.) How can I live with myself? Just fine thanks. FWIW Indians fans weren't saying much back in 1997 either when they crushed the Yankees in the playoffs on the way to an AL pennant.

As I said in an earlier post, the Yankees have not always spent their money wisely. But when they do, it is because they have the money that they compete at a high level.

As for 1997, IIRC the Indians were made up of several Indians' farm players, spectacular trades (Kenny Lofton, Sandy Alomar, etc..), and a few well thought out free-agent acquisitions (Eddie Murray?). Dick Jacobs built the farm system up and the results show. We didn't need to say anything in 1997 because we did it the 'honest' way. We earned it.

Of course the Yankees were very good in the late 1990s. But again, it was because of several high-priced free agents as opposed to trades and a strong farm system. Not all of the very good Yankees came from free agency. Several came from the farm system, but the propotion of quality free agent signees was/is much higher because of the money.

We beat them in 1997 because we had a fantastic team. The only difference between the two teams is how the teams were built.

I stand by my prior statements.

C'mon. I hate this arguement. You make it sound like Artie Moreno and Frank McCourt share a cardboard box that they're living in under the 101 Freeway. The owners are all very wealthy and are looking to stay very wealthy. The reason other owners don't spend a dime more than they have to is because they don't want to.

The Yankees do exactly what we all wish Amtrak would do and that is to spend more money (wisely) to improve their product.

"We beat them in 1997 because we had a fantastic team. The only difference between the two teams is how the teams were built."

Seriously?

Alrighty then:

1997

Cleveland Indians Orig. team

Roberts 2b PADRES (T) (Tony Fernandez played 120 games for CLE in 97 was an FA from NYY. He was replaced as a starter by Jeter)

Vizquel ss MARINERS (T)

Ramirez rf INDIANS

Thome 1b INDIANS

Justice dh BRAVES (T)

Williams 3b GIANTS (T)

Alomar c PADRES (T)

Giles lf INDIANS

Grissom cf EXPOS (T)

Hershiser p DODGERS (FA)

Mesa-cl ORIOLES (T)

NY Yankees

Raines dh EXPOS (T)

Jeter ss YANKEES

O'Neill rf REDS (T)

Williams cf YANKEES

Martinez 1b MARINERS (T)

Curtis lf ANGELS (T)

Boggs 3b RED SOX (FA)

Girardi c CUBS (T)

Sanchez 2b CUBS (T)

Pettite YANKEES

Cone p ROYALS (FA)

Rivera p YANKEES

Now. What was that you were saying?

O'Neill and Martinez both were acquired in trades (and were the cornerstones of those great Yankee teams) as was Curtis (from Cleveland ironically). Girardi came in a deal from Colorado. Raines came via trade from the White Sox. Sanchez came from the Cubs in a trade though three different guys played second that season (Sojo and Duncan too). Posada was on the 97 team but wasn't the everyday catcher at that point. From the rosters provided they were fairly evenly built. Neither Lofton who was in Atlanta in 97, nor Murray were on the 97 Indians. I'm thinking the evidence is showing your statements to not be as solid as you thought no harm no foul.

Let's face it though. Some teams are better at player development then others. Minnesota comes immediately to mind as does Oakland though not as recently. Even when they couldn't afford a player anymore they had someone right there in the minors to take his place. Florida this year fielded a very competitive team with a very low payroll. Also, not only are the owners businesspeople but so are the players. I can't blame them for trying to maximize their earning potential during a time limited career. I'm ok with teams building however they can as long as they stay within their means. The Yankees spend a lot of money but other teams benefit from that in the form of the Luxury Tax payments they make to MLB which are dispersed to the other teams. The Yankees also haven't been to the World Series in six years and the last time they did they lost to the same franchise that beat Cleveland in 97. The Marlins.

 

[D.P. Roberts]

Cliff Lee vs CC Sabathia in game 1.
I'm an Indians fan. How depressing. :angry:

Exactly. The real winners of the 2009 World Series are the 2007 Cleveland Indians!

And just to try to keep it on topic: the Indians would have more fans if you could get to Cleveland from Columbus or Cincinnati via Amtrak.

(Note: I know you can get from Cincinnati to Cleveland via Chicago, but that takes 24-28 hours via the Cardinal-LSL, so I'm not counting that. I'm also not counting buses. I hope the Tri-C rail system actually happens- I'll actually be able to go to more Indians games that way, thus increasing the team's revenue).

Speaking of which, based on a quick look at Amtrak's system map I think Cleveland and Cincinnati are the two largest cities in America that have the longest train connection relative to their physical distance. In other words, are there any 2 other cities that have higher populations, are physically closer together, and have a longer Amtrak connection? I'm not counting thruway buses, so cities like Phoenix and Columbus, OH don't count. I used travel time rather than physical distance because A) It's easier to calculate on amtrak.com and B) the timing of connections has to figure into one's travel plans.

Cleveland (pop. 430,000) to Cincinnati (pop. 330,000) Physical distance: 244 mi, approximately 5 hours driving time. Amtrak travel time: 24 hours

Savannah, GA (pop. 132,000) to Atlanta (pop. 537,000) Physical distance: 248 miles, approx. 4 hours driving time. Amtrak travel time: 30 hours

I'm just wondering how many other city pairs there are out there that are easy drives (say, less than 300 miles), which would make them good candidates for rail (especially compared to flying), but they're basically inaccessible to each other.

 

[Steve4031]

I was joking with a friend that they should use a NJT set lol.GO YANKEES!!!

Slightly off topic, but after loosing to the Bengals 45-10 the Bears don't even deserve to ride NJT transit cars. There !@#!@@ should stay in Cincinnati because I don't want representing Chicago or me in anything.