Cubs vs Sox vs MLB

I was asked to produce comparative data on the success
of the White Sox with respect to the Cubs and other MLB
teams. The data below was derived from Sean Lahman's
2005 database.

Table 1 shows the Won-Lost Percentage for all games played
by all teams since the end of WWII. The White Sox rank 8th
while the Cubs rank 26th which means the other 15 original
franchises plus 10 expansion teams have better WLP's than
do the Cubs.

Table 2 showa the number of seasons in which team had a
winning record, a losing record, or they won as many games
as they lost. Here the White Sox rank 7th and the Cubs rank
20th. The Cubs trail all of the other 15 original MLB
franchises plus the Astros, the Mets, the Royals, and the
Angels.

Table 3 whows the number of consecutive winning seasons a
team has had. Here the White Sox are 3rd and the Cubs are
in a three way tie for 18th with two expansion teams and
have three expansion teams ahead of them.

Note: I was going to use 1947 as the base year because it
is the beginning of Full-Competition-Baseball, but I used
1946 because it was a winning year for the Cubs. Also
I have run this for different years to 2005. Once you
pass the Durocher years and start at 1973, the Cubs drop
in every category.

The point of this had to do with someone writing that the
White Sox had a loser image. Just the reverse is true.
The Cubs have a history of failure and the evidence is
in front of you.

I lay this failure not on the Cubs' players or the Cubs'
fans, but upon Cubs management (Wrigley and the Tribune)
for not investing adequately in the team and the ballpark.
The Cubs are a cash cow for the Tribune.

An interesting point is that Wrigley had the lights ordered
to be installed for the 1942 season. WWII began and Wrigley
gave the lights to the military and then created an aura of
day Baseball being cool. Day Baseball in July and August is
is not cool - it is a killer. That's why the joke was the
Cubs will fold in August.

The Cubs are not a competitive franchise and they should
be. Nothing would be better for the City of Chicago than
to have both teams playing over .500


Table 1 Table 2 Table 3
------------- --------------- ------------
Team WLP Team W L T Team Streak
---- ----- ---- --------- ---- ------
1 NYY .5710 NYY 50-10- 0 NYY 19
2 LAD .5498 LAD 47-12- 1 BAL 18
3 BOS .5321 BOS 43-16- 1 CHW 17
4 STL .5273 STL 40-19- 1 BOS 16
5 ATL .5261 ATL 39-20- 1 ATL 14
6 SFG .5197 SFG 39-21- 0 SFG 14
7 CIN .5136 CHW 34-24- 2 LAD 12
8 CHW .5088 DET 32-27- 1 DET 11
9 CLE .5066 CIN 31-28- 1 TOR 11
10 ARI .5031 BAL 30-29- 1 CIN 10
11 BAL .5024 CLE 27-32- 1 CLE 10
12 HOU .4996 OAK 27-32- 1 OAK 9
13 DET .4941 PHI 25-32- 3 PHI 9
14 TOR .4938 PIT 24-35- 1 STL 8
15 KCR .4905 HOU 22-18- 4 PIT 7
16 ANA .4898 MIN 21-35- 4 HOU 7
17 PHI .4886 NYM 20-24- 0 NYM 7
18 PIT .4849 KCR 18-19- 0 KCR 6
19 OAK .4846 ANA 17-26- 2 CHC 6
20 WSN .4840 CHC 16-42- 2 MIL 6
21 MIN .4784 TEX 16-29- 0 WSN 5
22 NYM .4738 TOR 15-14- 0 ARI 5
23 FLA .4723 WSN 14-20- 3 SEA 4
24 MIL .4711 SDP 11-24- 2 MIN 3
25 SEA .4699 MIL 10-25- 2 TEX 3
26 CHC .4676 SEA 9-20- 0 COL 3
27 TEX .4670 ARI 5- 3- 0 ANA 2
28 COL .4645 FLA 4- 9- 0 SDP 2
29 SDP .4590 COL 4- 9- 0 FLA 1
30 TBD .4006 TBD 0- 8- 0 TBD 0

Dick Adams wrote:
> I lay this failure not on the Cubs' players or the Cubs'
> fans, but upon Cubs management (Wrigley and the Tribune)
> for not investing adequately in the team and the ballpark.
> The Cubs are a cash cow for the Tribune.

And that is the all-explaining fact here. Win or lose, Wrigly field
makes money. I watched the game against the Florida Marlins last night,
and noted that the attendance was a little over 9000. There were entire
banks of bleachers that were entirely empty. Win or lose, Wrigley field
is ALWAYS full to the gills. Cubs fans are a very special breed, among
baseball fans...they are truly loyal to their team. Comisky Park (now
US Cellular field) has never been able to claim this success. Sox fans
are actually the more common breed...the "jump on the winning
bandwagon" breed. If the Sox started losing you would see the Cell full
of echoes rather than bodies.

> An interesting point is that Wrigley had the lights ordered
> to be installed for the 1942 season. WWII began and Wrigley
> gave the lights to the military and then created an aura of
> day Baseball being cool. Day Baseball in July and August is
> is not cool - it is a killer. That's why the joke was the
> Cubs will fold in August.

You seem to be a "facts" man. What did Comisky Park do in 1942? Did
they have lights installed sometime before that? Did they say "screw
you" to the war effort? Did they say "screw you" to America and
continue to play night games with only profit in mind? I don't know the
answers to these questions, so maybe you can find them.

> The Cubs are not a competitive franchise and they should
> be. Nothing would be better for the City of Chicago than
> to have both teams playing over .500

I love to see them win every year too! But I will remain a faithful fan
whether they win OR lose. I couldn't care less about the City of
Chicago...I am faithful to a team.