Top 30 Logos: 20-11

Continuing the three-part series started yesterday, here's the second installment of the thirty best logos, one from each franchise. As I said yesterday, many thanks to Chris Creamer and sportslogos.net.

20. Texas Rangers, primary, 1984-1993
Like about half the logos on this list, the only thing I can think of when I see this is "Nolan Ryan." Anyway, I've always had a soft spot for this logo.  There's something so calmingly retro about it, I just can't explain.  I'm confused as to why the state of Texas is bulging due to a huge baseball in the middle of it (they really couldn't have fit the ball within the state's normal borders?), but there's nothing bad about this.

19. New York Yankees, primary, 1913-1946
Babe Ruth.  Tradition.  Lou Gehrig.  Aura.  Mystique.  Sorry, I got carried away there.  This logo gets props for being "classic" in a way that's actually not bad.  The interlocking NY is admittedly iconic, and they've more or less kept it the same since the early 20th century.  Also, this logo gets points for not being the Yankees' only other logo--the terrible one with the hat.

18. Boston Red Sox, primary, 1976-2008
Ha, the Red Sox beat the Yankees!  Take that, Aaron Boone!  This is another classic-seeming logo (though it's only actually been around since the 1970s, apparently).  I like the socks on the baseball, though I actually prefer it with the team name surrounding it (as opposed to this earlier model).  Honestly, this logo's kind of boring, in that there's nothing particularly exciting about it, but I can't find any flaws with it.  Solid job.

17. Minnesota Twins, primary, 1976-1986
There are a number of variations on the Minnie & Paul theme, but I like this one the best.  The "Win! Twins!" theme is hokey in a very cute way, and the whole concept is just a lot of fun.  That said, it's way too busy to be a really effective logo.  It strikes me more as a cartoon that the Minneapolis Star Tribune would have run in the 1960s.  This is probably ranked too high (as in, closer to #1), but I'm just a huge fan of the friendly twin city embodiments.

16. Houston Astros, primary, 1975-1993
Whoever thought to put the Astrodome on this team's logo was either an idiot or a genius.  Honestly, though, it works pretty well.  I don't like how it distracts from the team (they should be the focus, not their stadium), but the Astrodome was such a key part of the Astros' identity that it makes some sense.  The atom symbol doesn't though.  Just because a team is related to space doesn't mean that they get to envelop everything science related.  This logo is so dated that you can't help but love it.

15. Chicago Cubs, primary, 1979-present
At first I chose this logo for the Cubbies, and then realized I was making a huge mistake.  Similar to the Sox logo above, this one seems so familiar that you don't realize it didn't exist in its present form until 1979.  That being said, I just love it.  Again similar to the Sox logo, there's nothing particularly great about it, hence why I can't rank it higher, but I like it a lot nonetheless.

14. Philadelphia Phillies, primary, 1992-present
There's a lot going on in this logo.  Unlike with some other logos, however, that's not that much of a problem, as it all goes together pretty well.  We have a baseball diamond, a liberty bell, and the team name with stars dotting the "i"s, but I don't have any big problems with it.  The red, white, and blue is a bit conventional--but what did you expect from a team with a liberty bell on its logo?--and they don't always go well together.  In fact, there's so much of each of these colors that it can get a bit distracting.  Still, this is a classy logo.

13. Detroit Tigers, primary, 1961-1993
This (cocaine using?) tiger isn't the fiercest--though it's better than this--but it's a good logo nonetheless.  It gets to the point: here is our name, here are our colors, here is a visual representation of our team name.  They lose a little bit, but not that much, due to the sloppiness of the tiger.

12. Pittsburgh Pirates, primary, 1968-1986
I really like this.  Rather than make the pirate seem too fierce, as this team's been known to do, they have a simple drawing of a guy on what looks like a wanted poster.  The team name is a little bit on the small side, and the drawing is perhaps too complex--ideally, you'll want your logo to be easily drawable by kids--but I can overlook that.  I love how the "paper" is tearing around the edges, as well as the nails in the corners.  Good stuff.  (Side-note: does anybody else think the pirate looks like Jim Palmer?)

11. Los Angeles Dodgers, primary, 1958-present
Speaking of classic, the Dodgers haven't changed their logo since they moved out west.  It's easy to see why. The great Dodgers script is the best script logo in the game, and the shooting ball adds a bit of color (red) to the logo without overpowering the traditional blue in any way.  The logo is lively enough without being distracting in any way.  True, it's a bit boring like all "classic" logos are, but this one does it better than almost any of the others.

2011 Predictions: NL East

1. Philadelphia Phillies

Maybe it’s the optimistic Mets fan in me, but I believe that it’s entirely possible that this team could disappoint.  Chase Utley?  Injured.  Jimmy Rollins and Shane Victorino?  On the decline.  The other non-Ryan Howard parts of the lineup?  Severely underwhelming.  If everything goes wrong—not even horribly wrong, but just not as well as the Phillies would like—the Phillies’ once-great lineup becomes very mortal.  Yes, their pitching will almost certainly negate whatever their lineup manages, but even great pitchers have off years.  What if Cliff Lee and Roy Oswalt (for example) don’t perform as well as the Phillies would like?  All of a sudden we could be looking at a wide open NL East.

Bottom line: There’s a 95% chance that the Phillies will mop the floor with the NL East on their way to a World Series appearance.  But what if…?

2. Atlanta Braves

While the Phillies’ offense has great potential, but a lot of room within which to fail, the Braves’ lineup is just plain great.  Brian McCann, Dan Uggla, and Jason Heyward provide a solid foundation, while all the peripheral parts have high performance ceilings (especially touted prospect Freddie Freeman and Nate McLouth, who’s looking to rebound from an atrocious 2010).  The pitching, however, is in a bit sorrier shape, with far too much reliance placed on veteran Tim Hudson and novice Tommy Hanson.  Even if these two replicate (or at least, produce something close to) their 2010 seasons, that doesn't make up for the lack of depth in the rest of the rotation.

Bottom line: The Braves can and should be good, but will find it difficult to compete for even the Wild Card if one of their pitchers doesn’t step up as a true ace.

3. New York Mets

(Author’s note: I am a diehard Mets fan.) Why all the negativity?  Due to the disappointment of the last few years it’s trendy to say that “the Mets suck,” or some variant on that theme, but this team decidedly does not suck.  The offense is packed with potential, from the great David Wright, to the rebounding Jason Bay, to the very underrated Angel Pagan, to sophomore slugger Ike Davis (not to mention Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran, who are looking to recapture the magic of years gone by).  The pitching is, obviously, filled with uncertainty.  With Johan Santana out until at least the All-Star Break, Mike Pelfrey is playing the ill-fitting role of ace.  Despite no true great pitcher on the staff, Chris Young and Chris Capuano were excellent pickups by GM Sandy Alderson.  Look for one or both of them to get injured, but not before giving the Mets solid pitching.  And if they manage to miraculously survive the season without getting hurt?  This team could be in the thick of the Wild Card hunt.

Bottom line: With low expectations, this team should surprise everybody and contend well into August, if not beyond.

4. Florida Marlins

While the Marlins have a good deal of promise, I can never find it in my heart to pick them.  Consider: while Hanley Ramirez will be great as usual, the rest of their offense relies heavily on young players who haven’t consistently produced (or even had the chance to do so) at a Major League level before.  Their pitching should be solid, assuming Javier Vazquez can revert to his pre-2010 form, and the non-Josh Johnson starters can build on strong 2010s.  While I think that all can happen, I’m not that bullish on it being good enough to overcome their offensive failings.

Bottom line: This team will probably be able to go .500, though if their offensive clicks more than I think it will they could claw their way to second place.  It’s a strong division….

5. Washington Nationals

Let’s start with the good: Jayson Werth is an adequate (though obviously overpaid) replacement, and then some, for Adam Dunn’s bat.  Ryan Zimmerman is still one of the best third basemen in the game.  Rick Ankiel and Mike Morse, if productive, can take the lineup from adequate to good.  And… that’s it.  Their offense will be fine, but it’s the pitching that should give Nats fans major cause for concern.  I’m excited to see what Jordan Zimmerman can give over a full season, but let’s be honest here: this is a rotation that is almost wholly comprised of back of the rotation starters.  The upside for this bunch is very limited, with Livan Hernandez as the only real hope for non-mediocrity (fine, maybe Jason Marquis, but I am unconvinced).

Bottom line: Bryce Harper and Stephen Strasburg playing together in 2012 will be awesome.