For the thirteenth time in franchise history, the Giants have ended a regular season with 90+ losses. It\u2019s the tenth time in the San Francisco era where the team has piled up that much losing in a single year and the fourth time in the Oracle Park era. In fact, since 2000, the San Francisco Giants have had fewer winning seasons (13) than winning ones (14). But there were the Bonds years and those three World Championships, so, it\u2019s not like we haven\u2019t been able to enjoy plenty of positives since the turn of the century.<\/p>\n
Still, that\u2019s a surprising amount of losing for what\u2019s supposed to be one of baseball\u2019s crown jewel franchises and for a team that touts its desire to remain competitive (while still being financially responsible). The Giants are a money-making business and they\u2019re quite good at making money. Which might explain why the baseball operation doesn\u2019t come off as successful. But maybe that\u2019s all relative?<\/p>\n
For one thing, we don\u2019t have to view their two recent 81-81 seasons as bad things. Maybe they\u2019re not technically \u201cwinning\u201d seasons, but the Houston Astros just (briefly) made the postseason with that exact record. If that\u2019s now a bar for success, then maybe the Giants have, in some lowered measure approximating respect, managed to have a good amount of success in their waterfront park (15 non-losing seasons to 12).<\/p>\n
And for another thing, since this ownership group took control and saved the team from moving to Tampa Bay, they\u2019ve posted the 8th-most wins in MLB with a record of 2,756-2,583 (.516). 9 playoff appearances in 34 seasons. 3 World Championships. Those Bonds year. That beautiful stadium. Jeff Kent is a Hall of Famer. Dusty Baker and Bruce Bochy are headed there, too. Buster Posey, too. Brian Sabean, probably. It has been a really high volume of success. They\u2019re not in the top 3, but they have a good showing on the winning Top 10:<\/p>\n
Yankees: 3,110-2,224Atlanta: 2,990-2,346Dodgers: 2,987-2,353Red Sox: 2,890-2,450Cardinals: 2,855-2,480Guardians: 2,832-2,502Astros: 2,789-2,550Giants: 2,756-2,583Phillies: 2,710-2,630Mariners: 2,681-2,656<\/p>\n
The Yankees have stayed The Yankees. The Dodgers are what they are (criminals). Boston broke their curse and basically remade themselves into a topflight organization (though with plenty of behind the scenes drama).<\/p>\n
They are the top 3 organizations in the sport. If a fourth team joined them on a Mt. Rushmore, who would be the best fit?<\/p>\n
Atlanta raises the question of, \u201cis it better to be in the playoffs every year or is it better to win the World Series a few more times?\u201d because in the span of time when the Giants have been owned by this particular group, Atlanta has won just 2 world championships in 23 trips to the postseason (including the current one). Still, that\u2019s a lot more money each year with postseason revenue\u2026<\/p>\n
The Phillies have been chasing their 1 title in 2008 for nearly two decades now. They and Atlanta are also the two losingest franchises (11,457 and 11,096, respectively).<\/p>\n
The Guardians sure do win a lot except for when it counts the most. They\u2019ve won just 2 championships and the last one was in 1948.<\/p>\n
The Mariners don\u2019t even have the titles under their belt.<\/p>\n
There\u2019s nothing genuine about what the Astros did. Lose 100 games for a few years, get some talent, then cheat when the games matter most? Add to that, Jeff Luhnow has been the architect of MLB\u2019s assault on its labor force. Just don\u2019t see how Houston could join those three teams.<\/p>\n
This \u201csince 1993\u201d cutoff cuts off the Tampa Bay Rays, who might warrant general consideration.<\/p>\n
The Cardinals probably have the strongest claim insofar as they have 11 championships to their name. They have the history and tradition angle. Their stadium\u2019s even a little bit younger than Oracle Park.<\/p>\n
But there was a moment in time, alllllll the way back in the 2010s, when the San Francisco Giants had the chance to be one of baseball\u2019s big 4 teams, setup by those 3 titles in 5 seasons along with the ballpark and all the history. That didn\u2019t wind up being the case, because baseball is very hard and the dominant Giants of the past can\u2019t really exist in today\u2019s world, but rather than stumble around for an idea here, let me bring this piece into focus:<\/p>\n
Are the Giants losers? Are we rooting for a losing franchise? Have the San Francisco Giants held on to their brief success in the 2010s so hard and so long that they\u2019ve actually become losers? Did they become Al Bundy<\/a>? It\u2019s entirely possible that Buster Posey stepping into the role of President of Baseball Operations was that particular fever or malaise breaking, but the results haven\u2019t quite followed and really oughtn\u2019t figure to follow \u2014 at least in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n They\u2019re still #8 in wins in this Oracle Park era (2,198-2,071, .515) and with three championships, they\u2019re tied with the Dodgers for the moment. Seems impossibly stupid to describe them as losers or even suggest it. I also consider \u201closer\u201d more of a state of mind or behavioral, and as disappointing (or abhorrent) as the Giants\u2019 behavior has been recently, I\u2019ve got to admit that the winning is strong enough to balance that out to a degree.<\/p>\n But how should we describe this moment in time?<\/p>\n If we chop off the first 10 seasons of Oracle Park history and just look at their record since their dynasty of the 2010s began, they fall to thirteenth in wins (1,343-1,309), in an exact tie with the Chicago Cubs. They\u2019re the last two teams with winning records (.506) in MLB over this span. That\u2019s\u2026 remarkable. And shocking. And\u2026 not great for a team that won three titles in five seasons.<\/p>\n The Boston Red Sox, who\u2019ve won the most World Series in the 21st century so far, are just #8 in wins (1,401-1,251; .528), but I think that speaks more to the top heaviness that the league has settled into. And that\u2019s not a comment on the league\u2019s financials. Look at the list:<\/p>\n Dodgers: 1,570-1,082 (.592)Yankees: 1,508-1,143 (.569)Rays: 1,440-1,213 (.543)Atlanta: 1,430-1,220 (.540)Cardinals: 1,421-1,229 (.536)Brewers: 1,419-1,234 (.535)Guardians: 1,403-1,246 (.530)Red Sox: 1,401-1,251 (.528)Astros: 1,365-1,286 (.515)Phillies: 1,353-1,299 (.510)Blue Jays: 1,345-1,307 (.507)Cubs: 1,343-1,309 (.506)Giants: 1,343-1,309 (.506)Rangers: 1,233-1331 (.498)Mets: 1,318-1,334 (.497)<\/p>\n The list gets even scarier if you just look at their record since the start of 2017. The Giants drop to 18th (736-782, .485). Only two other teams with sub-.500 records are ahead of them: the Mets (758-760) and Dbacks (750-768). The 12 teams with fewer wins since the end of the dynasty: A\u2019s, Reds, Nats, Rangers, O\u2019s, Angels, Pirates, Marlins, Tigers, White Sox, Royals, Rockies. This is a rough group to be a part of and it\u2019s a little surprising that everyone running the team seems perfectly fine with it.<\/p>\n Forget the division. The franchise isn\u2019t even a third Wild Card contender. Baseball keeps lowering the bar and the Giants keep lowering theirs to come up short. And if you think that sounds extreme, since the third Wild Card was introduced for the 2022 season, the Giants are 386-424 (.477) \u2014 21st in wins.<\/p>\n Both John Shea<\/a> and former site contributor groug<\/a> have taken a look at the Giants ownership group over the past several years and the two reporters have sort of hit on the same idea: the group is a hybrid of old family money who invested because they\u2019re fans of the team alongside \u201ca sports team is a sensible investment\u201d new money. Has the decision-making of the majority owners become calcified to the point that the demands of the new money sort of even the team out to simply being an extraction business? Are the Giants just in it for the theater and China Basin? Maybe that has always been the case, using the civic pride for the team itself as a wedge issue to get in there and seize valuable Bay Area real estate, greasing the wheels and appeasing any \u201cinterest groups\u201d for as long as they\u2019re needed, then discarding when it becomes inconvenient.<\/p>\n So, is this the Extraction Era?<\/p>\n Well, there\u2019s the private financing for the stadium, the $3.37 billion in payroll since 2000 (according to Cot\u2019s MLB Contracts<\/a>), the Arizona training complex, the improved international facilities\u2026 they have invested in the team to a degree. But there\u2019s also Mission Rock. The new money coming in to help with that, even, despite its supposed self-sufficiency. That $3.37 billion in payroll has only amounted to the team being in the top 5 just three times (2015, 2017, 2018).<\/p>\n Again, it just seems odd that a team that has invested so much should come up so short. It has moved beyond disappointment to a real point of frustration. As though it\u2019s just enough money to create the illusion of competitiveness without actually amounting to that. This has truly only been a symptom of the post-championship era, though, which is why I suggested calcification and a de-prioritization of success.<\/p>\n To wit, the pandemic\/COVID season really does skew things a bit, but the Giants have never lost so many games (782) in a 1,518-game span\u2026 in their history<\/a>!<\/p>\n Obviously, this stretch isn\u2019t as bad as the 1970s. The Giants traded away Willie Mays in 1972, and from 1972-1985, the team was dreadful, losing 1,165 out of 2,208 games (.472). This is the only span in Giants history where that\u2019s happened. In fact, if you drop the search criteria to a minimum of 1,100 losses out of 2,200 games, this is still the losingest stretch in franchise history. I still need to see the results of 4 more seasons before I can have any room to complain! And I might not even have that \u201cright\u201d in 2031, given that the team won a franchise-record 107 games\u2026 and my personal assurance that the team will be competitive again in 2030.<\/p>\n But, also, the team has the #1 rated farm system at the moment. 2030 might be a little conservative. This enterprise could turn around well before then. And I can\u2019t help but note that I can throw in positives no matter how much history I cite. Maybe this agonizing over the team being one of the worst in the sport for most of the last decade and a decent chunk of the century is entitlement.<\/p>\n Sure, we watch sports to be entertained. But if we\u2019re following them every day in a six-month season, aren\u2019t we also doing so to watch peak performance along with the thrill of victory? I\u2019m not sure what the value proposition is with professional competitive live sports beyond that. I guess I\u2019m mentioning this because a criticism of people who wonder about the team\u2019s track record is that it sounds like entitlement.<\/p>\n It just seems to be getting more difficult with each passing year to play the \u201cwait \u2018til next year\u201d\/\u201chope springs eternal\u201d card. Year after year, the Giants have managed to tack on as a sort of drag coefficient something to make the disappointment of the season sting a little worse. This year, it\u2019s pretty obvious. That terrible record and all those injuries were made worse by the bigotry. They let down a significant number of fans with that loser behavior. But maybe that\u2019s not the first time something like it has happened. The Giants were probably worse to their fans in the 70s, since everything about the Giants in the 1970s was worse than today, apparently.<\/p>\n But there were plenty of verifiable firsts, things I\u2019d never think would happen: the first time the Giants have gone five consecutive seasons without a plus-.500 record. Or, to put it another way: the first time they\u2019ve lost 80+ games five years in a row. The first time in over 120 years that they\u2019ve ended a season trailing the Dodgers in their now-dead<\/a> rivalry by 2 games. The first time they blew a 6-run lead in the ninth inning<\/a>. The first time they offered to pay their fans to attend games<\/a> in the final month of the season.<\/p>\n