How good were the 2004 Cardinals

[imadangman]

Seeing that the Cardinals managed to go about 3 weeks without losing 2 consecutive games, I decided to go back and observe some things about the 2004 Cardinals.

From May 27 (23-22) to Sept 7 (92-44) was an incredible run

They lost consecutive games only 4 times during this stretch. They lost only 3 series.

They had two 6 game winning streaks, three 5 game winning streaks, a 7 game winning streak, an 8 game winning streak, and a 9 game winning streak.

19-9 June
20-5 July (.800)
21-7 August (.750)

It was about the hottest team we've seen.

The only detraction maybe was that they really beat up on Cincy and Pittsburgh all summer long. Anyway, the only team that actually won their season series against the Cardinals was Houston.

[sikeston bulldog2]

Seeing that the Cardinals managed to go about 3 weeks without losing 2 consecutive games, I decided to go back and observe some things about the 2004 Cardinals.

From May 27 (23-22) to Sept 7 (92-44) was an incredible run

They lost consecutive games only 4 times during this stretch. They lost only 3 series.

They had two 6 game winning streaks, three 5 game winning streaks, a 7 game winning streak, an 8 game winning streak, and a 9 game winning streak.

19-9 June
20-5 July (.800)
21-7 August (.750)

The only detraction maybe was that they really beat up on Cincy and Pittsburgh all summer long. Anyway, the only team that actually won their season series against the Cardinals was Houston.

Good enough to get swept AND never led one complete inning in 36. Swept.

Other than that they were the best team I’d seen.

[rbirules]

The best summer I've ever had being a Cardinals fan, the fall wasn't as great as other iterations sadly (game 4 of the world series was the only home playoff game I didn't attend. That NLCS was amazing.).

First opening day I ever went to. As you point out they were around .500 at the end of May but their June, July, and August stretch which sealed the division was the best extended stretch of baseball I've ever watched, especially up close.

[Ronnie Dobbs]

Best team I've ever seen. I think 2006 was somehow fate's way to make up for the fact that we didn't win the World Series that year.

[thetank2]

Then in 2006 they lost 7 consecutive 3 times and 8 consecutive games 1 time until recovering and winning the WS.

Yes 2004 should have been a WS winner.

[sikeston bulldog2]

I say again. Never led one complete inning in 36 played. Give that some thought. This is supposed to be the greatest team most of us have seen- never led an inning.

Were the Sox that dominant. No I say.

[rbirules]

Best team I've ever seen. I think 2006 was somehow fate's way to make up for the fact that we didn't win the World Series that year.

Yep. The 2006 team actually started out hot just like the previous iterations (2005 was consistently great all year) but then fell off in the summer. That was the year Albert started out incredibly hot, even by his lofty standards.

From June 2004 to May 2006 the Cardinals played 327 games (just over two full seasons, which would be 324), and went 212-115. That's 105 win pace for 2 full seasons of baseball.

[sikeston bulldog2]

Best team I've ever seen. I think 2006 was somehow fate's way to make up for the fact that we didn't win the World Series that year.

Yep. The 2006 team actually started out hot just like the previous iterations (2005 was consistently great all year) but then fell off in the summer. That was the year Albert started out incredibly hot, even by his lofty standards.

From June 2004 to May 2006 the Cardinals played 327 games (just over two full seasons, which would be 324), and went 212-115. That's 105 win pace for 2 full seasons of baseball.

I’ve heard here 2005 might have been better than 2004.

[rbirules]

I say again. Never led one complete inning in 36 played. Give that some thought. This is supposed to be the greatest team most of us have seen- never led an inning.

Were the Sox that dominant. No I say.

We were missing our ace in the playoffs. Sox had an awesome team with much better SP (we had nobody close to Pedro or Schilling in the WS). We lead the league in position player fWAR, in part due to our great defense. Despite the MV3 we ranked 4th as a team in wRC+ at 107. Boston lead the league with a 114 wRC+, they had a deeper lineup.

[sikeston bulldog2]

I say again. Never led one complete inning in 36 played. Give that some thought. This is supposed to be the greatest team most of us have seen- never led an inning.

Were the Sox that dominant. No I say.

We were missing our ace in the playoffs. Sox had an awesome team with much better SP (we had nobody close to Pedro or Schilling in the WS). We lead the league in position player fWAR, in part due to our great defense. Despite the MV3 we ranked 4th as a team in wRC+ at 107. Boston lead the league with a 114 wRC+, they had a deeper lineup.

So then it was a great WS matchup. Only bested by a Yankee Cardinal series.

[rbirules]

I say again. Never led one complete inning in 36 played. Give that some thought. This is supposed to be the greatest team most of us have seen- never led an inning.

Were the Sox that dominant. No I say.

We were missing our ace in the playoffs. Sox had an awesome team with much better SP (we had nobody close to Pedro or Schilling in the WS). We lead the league in position player fWAR, in part due to our great defense. Despite the MV3 we ranked 4th as a team in wRC+ at 107. Boston lead the league with a 114 wRC+, they had a deeper lineup.

So then it was a great WS matchup. Only bested by a Yankee Cardinal series.

I would have much rather faced the Yankees than the Red Sox in 2004. Yankees rotation didn't scare me the way Pedro and Schilling did.

[sikeston bulldog2]

I say again. Never led one complete inning in 36 played. Give that some thought. This is supposed to be the greatest team most of us have seen- never led an inning.

Were the Sox that dominant. No I say.

We were missing our ace in the playoffs. Sox had an awesome team with much better SP (we had nobody close to Pedro or Schilling in the WS). We lead the league in position player fWAR, in part due to our great defense. Despite the MV3 we ranked 4th as a team in wRC+ at 107. Boston lead the league with a 114 wRC+, they had a deeper lineup.

So then it was a great WS matchup. Only bested by a Yankee Cardinal series.

I would have much rather faced the Yankees than the Red Sox in 2004. Yankees rotation didn't scare me the way Pedro and Schilling did.

Picture this as a Sox fan. You are down 3-0 to hated rival, sweep out, then sweep WS.

Eight straight wins. And wasn’t this the end of curse year?

The bloody sock game.

[rockondlouie]

Seeing that the Cardinals managed to go about 3 weeks without losing 2 consecutive games, I decided to go back and observe some things about the 2004 Cardinals.

From May 27 (23-22) to Sept 7 (92-44) was an incredible run

They lost consecutive games only 4 times during this stretch. They lost only 3 series.

They had two 6 game winning streaks, three 5 game winning streaks, a 7 game winning streak, an 8 game winning streak, and a 9 game winning streak.

19-9 June
20-5 July (.800)
21-7 August (.750)

It was about the hottest team we've seen.

The only detraction maybe was that they really beat up on Cincy and Pittsburgh all summer long. Anyway, the only team that actually won their season series against the Cardinals was Houston.

Had C. Carpenter (who we now know was an absolute beast) not gone down w/a season ending injury before the playoffs, then (IMO) they beat the Dead Sox.

No way in h e l l he'd have lost that Game 1.

[sikeston bulldog2]

Seeing that the Cardinals managed to go about 3 weeks without losing 2 consecutive games, I decided to go back and observe some things about the 2004 Cardinals.

From May 27 (23-22) to Sept 7 (92-44) was an incredible run

They lost consecutive games only 4 times during this stretch. They lost only 3 series.

They had two 6 game winning streaks, three 5 game winning streaks, a 7 game winning streak, an 8 game winning streak, and a 9 game winning streak.

19-9 June
20-5 July (.800)
21-7 August (.750)

It was about the hottest team we've seen.

The only detraction maybe was that they really beat up on Cincy and Pittsburgh all summer long. Anyway, the only team that actually won their season series against the Cardinals was Houston.

Had C. Carpenter (who we now know was an absolute beast) not gone down w/a season ending injury before the playoffs, then (IMO) they beat the Dead Sox.

No way in h e l l he'd have lost that Game 1.

Wasn’t that the game- game one,down a run,eighth inning, bases loaded, Rolen pops up foul on first pitch, and Jimmy K’s on 3-2.

[rockondlouie]

Seeing that the Cardinals managed to go about 3 weeks without losing 2 consecutive games, I decided to go back and observe some things about the 2004 Cardinals.

From May 27 (23-22) to Sept 7 (92-44) was an incredible run

They lost consecutive games only 4 times during this stretch. They lost only 3 series.

They had two 6 game winning streaks, three 5 game winning streaks, a 7 game winning streak, an 8 game winning streak, and a 9 game winning streak.

19-9 June
20-5 July (.800)
21-7 August (.750)

It was about the hottest team we've seen.

The only detraction maybe was that they really beat up on Cincy and Pittsburgh all summer long. Anyway, the only team that actually won their season series against the Cardinals was Houston.

Had C. Carpenter (who we now know was an absolute beast) not gone down w/a season ending injury before the playoffs, then (IMO) they beat the Dead Sox.

No way in h e l l he'd have lost that Game 1.

Wasn’t that the game- game one,down a run,eighth inning, bases loaded, Rolen pops up foul on first pitch, and Jimmy K’s on 3-2.

Scored 9 runs and lost!

NO WAY C. Carpenter gives the BoSox even close to 9 runs.

[rbirules]

I say again. Never led one complete inning in 36 played. Give that some thought. This is supposed to be the greatest team most of us have seen- never led an inning.

Were the Sox that dominant. No I say.

We were missing our ace in the playoffs. Sox had an awesome team with much better SP (we had nobody close to Pedro or Schilling in the WS). We lead the league in position player fWAR, in part due to our great defense. Despite the MV3 we ranked 4th as a team in wRC+ at 107. Boston lead the league with a 114 wRC+, they had a deeper lineup.

So then it was a great WS matchup. Only bested by a Yankee Cardinal series.

I would have much rather faced the Yankees than the Red Sox in 2004. Yankees rotation didn't scare me the way Pedro and Schilling did.

Picture this as a Sox fan. You are down 3-0 to hated rival, sweep out, then sweep WS.

Eight straight wins. And wasn’t this the end of curse year?

The bloody sock game.

Yes, that was the curse year. I wanted no part of the Red Sox once they won game 4, and then game 5, . . .

Great hitting team, two aces, and if they made the WS they would have already made history and looking to break a curse.