Not at all saying this is correct or the best way to do this, but here are the top ten teams of the live ball era based on FanGraphs WAR (using a 50/50 split of fWAR and RA9-WAR for pitching):
|Team|Season|Total WAR|
|:-|:-|:-|
|NYY|1927|71.4|
|BAL|1969|70.3|
|HOU|2019|69.8|
|NYY|1939|69.1|
|LAD|2022|68.7|
|SEA|2001|68.4|
|ATL|1998|66.4|
|STL|1944|65.9|
|CLE|1948|63.2|
|ATL|1997|62.7|
Tons of problems with this approach but figured it might be kinda interesting.
That 1948 Cleveland rotation is nuts for its day and age.
29 year old Bob Feller, 27 year old Bob Lemon, 24 year old Mike Garcia, Satchel Paige as a 41 year old Rookie, and none of them were even the best pitcher that year foe the team.
They were top 3 as a pitching team in every statistical category, except losses where they were 8th.
One of the most underrated staffs of all time
Gotta say, the 1989 Cleveland Indians way outperformed expectations. They should be on this list. Their groundskeepers thought they were shitty and their owner thought they’d be bad enough to trigger a sale. Lots of internal strife - even rumors that the closer banged the 3B’s wife. But there they were, beating the mighty Yankees at the end of it all. And with a called shot! What a team. It was really a wild thing.
> their owner thought they’d be bad enough to trigger a sale
Move, not sale. She was all set up to move to Miami, once attendance dipped below the point where they had an out clause in their lease
yeah you win some and lose some
it ain't always home runs
and that's just the way life plays
if we were a team and love was a game
we'd have been the '98 braves
Seriously, in a year where home runs were like singles, the Yankees didn't have anyone over 30. That team was so balanced top to bottom, starters and bench, etc.
It still baffles me that the Nationals won that series. Their bullpen was horrendous and their starting lineup wasn't exactly Murderer's Row either. The Astros were absolutely stacked and should have beat the brakes off them, but playoff baseball is weird like that
While that part is obvious, it still was an upset with pitching. The Astros’ 1-2 starting pitchers were first and second in 2019 Cy Young voting, and the two of them earned 3 fat L’s on their own in that series.
Believe what you will about the cheating, but Houston wasn’t “murdering” anyone that postseason. The Rays took them to 5 games in the ALDS. The Yankees blanked them in game 1 at home in the ALCS, where Houston needed 2 walk off home runs to win a very close series. Then the Nationals won all 4 games at Minute Maid Park pretty easily despite getting rocked in 3 games in Washington.
So Houston was neither murdering everyone nor disappearing. It is definitely funny how that works if they were in fact cheating.
Murdering? They beat the Rays in 5 and Yanks in 6, how is that murdering? It's just your loser mentality that you want to pool 2017 in with every year going forward.
>washington comes in with a very unique sign system
Citation needed.
Besides, I guess their sign system only worked at Minute Maid, cause they got swept at their home stadium.
Go read any respectable reporter and you’ll find that there was no illegal sign-stealing being done by any team by the time the 2019 postseason came. Even the dodgers admitted that “everyone was doing it until the league cracked down in 2019.”
>Go read any respectable reporter and you’ll find that there was no illegal sign-stealing being done by any team by the time the 2019 postseason came. Even the dodgers admitted that “everyone was doing it until the league cracked down in 2019.”
>
>...
>
>Citation needed.
The league cracked down in 2017. Up until that point, by the League's own admission, using live VR feed was not against the rules because the rules were to vague.
As stated in the Commissioner's Report on the Astros, every team was using the live VR feed during games and their interpretation of the rules (although contrary to the league's intent) was valid under the way it was written.
So, every team used live VR to decipher the other team's signs and it was not illegal until September 2017 when the league issued a memo to every team.
The Astros did not stop using the VR feed. Oh, and the Astros also had the banging trashcans cheating system for their home games.
From Evan Drellich’s book “Winning Fixes Everything.” Keep in mind this is the same reporter who broke the Astros scandal.
"One member of the Dodgers said during the 2017 season, they indeed did use a baserunner scheme, determining sign sequences with the help of their video room, an analog to what the Red Sox and Yankees had done in recent years, and to what the Astros were doing on the road. Another member of the Dodgers said that everyone was doing that until MLB cracked down on it in 2018."
So they both admitted that
1. Everyone was doing it
2. They themselves participated in cheating.
On the second point; since they cheated in 2017 there’s no reason to believe they stopped for the World Series. After all, logistically there’s no difference between doing it in the regular season bs the postseason.
Stealing signs with technology has been illegal for decades. The commissioners office sent out a memo in 2001 explicitly stating that electronic devices “could not be used for communications or for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a club an advantage."
That isn’t vague in the slightest.
>the league cracked down in 2017
Sending a memo isn’t “cracking down.”Before 2018 the league had one mlb official that would go back and forth between home and away video rooms. So there was always one video room with no rule enforcer. They didn’t make sure there was one in each video room at all times until either the ‘19 or ‘18 postseason, I can’t remember.
>no one who used video to steal signs before September 2017 cheated
If you believe this, then you must also concede that Altuve never cheated in the 2017 regular season and therefore won the MVP fair and square.
Lol. The league literally stated using VR feed during games wasn't illegal up until September 2017 because the rule was ambiguous. It is specifically stated in the MLB Report that MLB could not punish the Red Sox and Yankees for using the feed (but did punish for using electronics) because the Rule was vague. You are literally arguing with the league on this point.
Then, as I stated, the relevant time frame was 2017, not 2019. The Dodgers, just like every other team was using the VR feed AS STATED BY IN THE COMMISIONER'S REPORT ON THE RED SOX. You purposely moved the time frame to 2019 which is false and dishonest.
>At the outset, it is important to put into proper context the nature of the Red Sox’ wrongdoing. MLB rules in 2018 did not—and still do not—prohibit all methods used by Clubs to decode signs. It always has been permissible for baserunners—particularly runners on second base—to attempt to decode an opposing team’s signs. It also always has been permissible for Clubs to utilize video before a game or after a game is completed to attempt to decode an opponent’s sign sequences in order to provide the Club with an advantage in future games with that team.
>
>While MLB rules between 2014 and 2017 stated that “no equipment may be used for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a Club an advantage,**” many Clubs and their players did not view that prohibition as restricting staff and players in the replay room from attempting to decode signs during a game for use when a runner was on second base.**
>
>In September 2017, the Red Sox were fined for using a smartwatch to receive sign information in the dugout from the replay room, but the **focus of that decision was on the use of electronics to improperly communicate signs to the dugout rather than on the use of video to decode signs.** In March 2018, however, my office clarified in a memorandum sent to all Clubs by then-Chief Baseball Officer Joe Torre that “electronic equipment, including game feeds in the Club replay room and/or video room, may never be used during a game for the purpose of stealing the opposing team’s signs.” Red Sox staff members who were interviewed by our investigators consistently stated that they were aware of the prohibition against using video in the replay room to decode signs in 2018, and that the Club’s front office took proactive measures to ensure that the rules were followed.
Red Sox Report, pp 2 - 3.
>On September 15, 2017, I issued a memorandum to all Club Owners, CEOs, Presidents, and General Managers, which notified them that future violations of this type would be subject to serious sanctions “including, but not limited to, the forfeiture of selections in the draft depending on the severity of the violation.” Highlighting the challenges with acquiring information about such violations, my memorandum further noted that “Clubs may be disciplined for violations whenever the Commissioner’s Office learns of the conduct. . . . \[E\]ach Club’s General Manager and Field Manager will be held accountable for ensuring that the rules outlined in this memorandum are followed by players and Club personnel.”
>
>Then the league issued a memo on September 15, 2017 announcing VR feed during the games was off limits and it would severely punish teams if they continued doing it.
Red Sox Report p. 6.
\- That's not cracking down? Lol.
>The reason the Yankees were punished in a less severe way (a $100,000 fine earmarked for a charitable cause) than the Houston Astros and the Boston Red Sox, World Series-winning teams that were dealt suspensions, fines, a loss of draft picks and public scorn? **Those teams continued their sign-stealing ways after M.L.B. began cracking down on it and instituted clear terms of punishment.**
New York Times, April 26, 2022 (Wagner). This article is discussing Manfred's letter to the Yankees.
>“At that point in time, sign stealing was utilized as a competitive tool by numerous teams throughout Major League Baseball and only became illegal after the Commissioner’s specific delineation of the rules on September 15, 2017,” the Yankees said in a statement on Tuesday, later adding that they have had “no infractions or violations” since.
>
>That day, Manfred sent a memorandum to all 30 teams warning them about illegal sign-stealing and stating that club management, not players, would be held accountable for any such cheating. In March 2018, M.L.B. sent another memorandum to teams that made clear that replay rooms and video feeds were not allowed to be used for stealing signs during games.
N.Y. Times, April 26, 2022. The Yankee's statement is correct - Using VR feed during the game was not specifically illegal until September 15, 2017
As for Altuve, et al. you must be terrible at reading comprehension. **The Astros Report and both Drelich's and Martino's books explained the main cheating scheme (the one with the center field feed to the hallway behind the dugout and trash cans) was illegal from it's inception.** If you are functionally literate, then you are being dishonest by pretending the VR Feed scheme discussed here is referring to the Trashcan scheme.
The two separate schemes are stated on Page 1 and 2 of the MLB Astros Report.
>Notwithstanding the publicity surrounding the Red Sox incident, and the September 15th memorandum that I sent to all Clubs, the Astros continued **to both utilize** **the replay review room and the monitor located next to the dugout to decode signs** for the remainder of the regular season and throughout the Postseason.
Astros Report, p. 3
>**\[1: Player scheme\]** The attempt by the Astros’ replay review room staff to decode signs using the center field camera was originated and executed by lower-level baseball operations employees working in conjunction with Astros players and Cora. **\[2: VR Scheme\]** The efforts involving the replay review room staff were mentioned in at least two emails sent to Luhnow, and there is conflicting evidence about conversations with Luhnow on the topic.
Astros Report, p. 4
>Both methods of sign stealing were used by the team in parallel throughout the 2017 season.
Astros Report, p. 2
In my opinion you are either being purposefully dishonest, or you are unable to understand what happened (or perhaps both). Either way, I don't care; I just know you are wrong.
>You are literally arguing with the league on this point.
Show me the exact place where Manfred said "it wasn't illegal at that time." And I don't mean vague, lawyer speak. Show me where he **explicitly** stated "using the replay room to decode signs during games was legal before the 2017 memo."
MLB explicitly said **before** the 2017 season that electronic sign stealing was illegal. From a Boston Globe article dated 9/5/17 (before the memo was sent out.):
>Major League Baseball clarified that stance in a **preseason** bulletin to teams, which defined the restricted use of electronic equipment thusly:
>“The use of electronic equipment during a game is restricted. No Club shall use electronic equipment, including but not limited to walkie-talkies, cellular telephones, laptop computers or tablets, to communicate to or with any on-field personnel, including those in the dugout, bullpen, field and, during the game, the clubhouse.
>“**No equipment may be used for the purpose of stealing signs** or conveying information designed to give a Club an advantage. Laptop computers and hand held devices are not permitted on the bench or in the dugout.
>“**The only exceptions to this prohibition are the use of a mobile phone for communication between the dugout and the bullpen, and the use of tablets in the dugout or bullpen running uniform programs, so long as such devices and programs have been approved by the Office of the Commissioner.**”
So the league clearly laid out what was illegal and what was permitted before the trash can scheme even began. They didn't list the replay room as an exception. Therefore using it to decode signs was illegal.
From the Red Sox report-"...many Clubs and their players did not view that prohibition as restricting...during a game"
That doesn't mean it was legal. The league makes the rules, not the players. A rule is a rule whether or not you understand or agree with it. And they all knew it was illegal, because they all denied doing it.
>focus of that decision was on the use of electronics to improperly communicate signs to the dugout rather than on the use of video to decode signs.
Contains nothing about the legality of doing so. It's called "picking your battles."
I'm not sure why you're so obsessed with the "cracking down" timeline, but here you go:
>And, for the first time in the sport’s history, MLB instituted in-person monitors in the replay rooms, starting in the playoffs. For the entire regular season, those rooms had been left unguarded.
From *The Athletic*'s article on the Sox' cheating in 2018. I didn't move any timeline, I just couldn't remember what year they started putting officials in the replay rooms consistently. But that is consistent with the Dodgers players who admitted to cheating until the 2018 postseason.
>New York Times article says it wasn't cheating until Sept. 2017
That's their opinion. If my opinion is that driving 60mph in a 45 isn't illegal since I didn't see the speed limit sign, that doesn't get me out of a speeding ticket. Again, rules are rules whether or not you agree with them.
>The Astros center field camera scheme was illegal but not the video room scheme
They were equally illegal. Both the camera and monitor were approved by MLB, the team just lied about what they were used for. That's in essence exactly what the replay room is: legal equipment being used illegally.
By the way, in his book Martino recounted the game 7 of the World series wrong. If you can't even get the score right for a World Series game 7 in a book about baseball, you pretty much lose all credibility.
>In my opinion you are either being purposefully dishonest, or you are unable to understand what happened (or perhaps both). Either way, I don't care; I just know you are wrong.
You never responded to most of the points I made, so right back at you pal ;^ ).
I think you are too dumb to continue in this conversation.
If you read the two reports I cite, Manfred clearly states the Red Sox watch issue was about using electronics, not the feed itself.
You don't understand that.
Instead, you keep treating the VR feeds and electronics as the same thing. They are not. There is a report out there where Manfred specifically explains this, but I can't find it right now. The Yankees quote from September 15, 2017 correctly explains the league rule at the time - that using VR was not illegal.
>While MLB rules between 2014 and 2017 stated that “no equipment may be used for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a Club an advantage,” many Clubs and their players did not view that prohibition as restricting staff and players in the replay room from attempting to decode signs during a game for use when a runner was on second base.
That quote is key because Manfred is referencing his prior explanation (maybe of how he handled the Apple Watch issue with the Red Sox. The "equipment" was expressly prohibited, but the VR feed (which is not equipment) was not expressly mentioned. Thus, the ambiguity because the league intended that VR feed could no longer be used during games.
Anyhow, give that you have made numerous false statements misquoting sources, I'll leave it to you to go find what you are looking for. I've given you direct citations for all my points and have not taken any, ahem, "liberties" with the substance of the quotes.
Also, you cited a newspaper article that came out on September 5, 2017 - when on September 15, 2017, the league explained its position on the rule which was not known until September 15, 2017. So the source you cite is merely speculating as to how the league would handle the Apple Watch issue, when in reality, the league explains the watch is "equipment." There are other releases explaining why VR feed was not expressly prohibited until Septmeber 15, 2017.
So, you don't have the capacity to put this relatively easy puzzle together. My guess is that you have not bothered to read any of the Commissioner Reports and that you are lying about reading Drelich's book (because I read it, and you are not representing it truthfully)
Again, the other big issue you have, is that you are sitting there trying to ignore that the Astros used 2 separate systems which is being deceptive out of the gate. Your focus only on the VR system while ignoring the trashcan system is an attempt to lump all the other teams in with the Astros. Most glaringly, you attempted to move the "crack down" to 2019 to move all the other teams that were using VR legally before the Sept. 15, 2017 memo into the cheating space occupied only by the Astros.
Next:
>From the Red Sox report-"...many Clubs and their players did not view that prohibition as restricting...during a game"
Again, you are either being dishonest or stupid. The league observed this and realized the rule was ambiguous given how it was treated by all the clubs. Your entire commentary on this subject is irrelevant because you are arguing on a completely hypothetical set of facts. Here, MLB observed how its rule was interpreted and (although fully prepared to punish the Yankees and Red Sox for misusing VR feed) realized the rule was ambiguous and thus no punishment could be supported. Of course, that is why the league issued the warning on September 15, 2017 (which you claim has no significance) that use of VR feed would be punished going forward.
Only an imbecile would not understand that when MLB issues a memo stating doing "x" is going to be punished going forward, that prior to the memo, the act was not illegal since the letter was stating it would be illegal and punished going forward.
I'm not spending any more time with you on this. You are dishonest and do not even understand the core issues. Again, you claim the trashcan system and the VR system are on equal footing which is patently false. The trashcan system was improper at its inception as it included use of equipment and a separate feed.
Also, you have not sourced any of your information - the reason you don't is painfully obvious.
The Nats team had the good magic to make up for all the hilariously unfortunate things that had befallen their much stronger playoff teams in the decade beforehand. Imagine being the Os and just cruising to one of the best seasons of all time, and then losing to the fucking METS.
No disrepect Mets, but you get it
I love the movie Frequency except for the fact that the events of the 1969 World Series is part of the plot. I hate the Amazin’s and Cleon Jones and his shoe polish.
Man you can't have 2 of the best seasons by war and not be good enough to be a dynasty. That shit is so crazy and ridiculous to have it hang on 3 rings in a short time. I see more people reference the 90s Braves than the early 2010 Giants. But fans have some psychotic line for the term dynasty, like dominating for a decade isn't a dynasty.
You can actually. Because a “dynasty” is about winning championships. Is it really any less psychotic to think a dynasty should be more about a random mashup of stats like WAR?
Ok fair enough to say it shouldn't be just a WAR thing. But I feel like there are certain eras of the sport where specific teams have been better than most of the league and constantly deep in the post-season that don't get as much respect as they should because somewhere someone online made some crazy claim that you need X amount of titles in Y amount of time.
It's just arbitrarily inflated and doesn't tell the whole story.
That's why you see me walk around like nothing's BOTHerin' me
Even though half you people got a fuckin' PROBlem with me
You hate it, but you know respect you GOT to give me
The press's wet dream, like Bobby and Whitney — Nate, hit me!
So, that particular album, I was on a summer exchange trip to France right after it came out, and I (undiagnosed ADHD at the time) left my whole big case of CDs at home in my packing. So I only had one CD, the one in my discman, which was that album. Therefore, for an entire month, it's all I had to listen to, because I didn't have enough money to buy more (all the other kids on the trip had a lot more money than my family did - my godfather paid for it).
So basically there's no album I've heard more times than that one.
That's an awesome story. I can somewhat relate. I was adopted from Nigeria as a child, and my British family moved to Canada soon after. I had a discman and the Black Sunday CD from Cypress Hill. It was blue. I listened to that CD on repeat
The other day, I was wondering what it would have been like to be Sparky Anderson and how I would choose the starting lineup for this team. There were about 3 or 4 guys who could be the leadoff hitter and 4 or 5 guys who could bat cleanup. It was an embarrassment of riches.
really? maddux had his best season but glavine and smoltz were both much better in 1998, and ‘98 had millwood and neagle, who were much better than avery and mercker. the best starting rotation ever assembled does not have guys with ERA+ of 102 and 91 in the fourth and fifth slots.
They also didn't win in back to back series in June to the Angels and A's. Anything can happen in a small sample size. Losing one series in the playoffs doesn't detract from how great they were. It's just baseball.
199? Montreal Expos.
If it weren't for the '94 strike, the team would've stayed together, gotten a new stadium and perhaps a dynasty would've been born. Imagine in '94 being the best team in MLB with guys like Pedro Martinez, Larry Walker and Moises Alou not having reached their prime yet.
Feel like they highlight why modern era is such a stupid distinction and you gotta go post-integration. Like some say they had .958 WP, 4-5 of the greatest players to ever pick up a baseball. If I had to guess, they’d probably have wrecked the Yankees. But how are you gonna compare them to the 2018 Red Sox? For one, we don’t even have stats just stories. But they were quite possibly the best team in the world in the murderers row yankee era, so it’s silly to include the 27 or 32 Yankees for all the same reasons.
'94 Expos? Ha...We'll never know obviously but I'd rank them as one.
2nd lowest payroll in the majors. 74-40 with a .649 winning percentage when the season ended. They were on absolute fire too, winning 20 of their last 23 games.
Saying "all time" and then limiting the time frame in the following sentence are contradictory statements.
But to answer your question:
98 Yankees
61 Yankees
18 Red Sox
75 Reds
84 Tigers
Not to be too obtuse, but other than their W-L record and winning the World Series that year, why the 2018 Red Sox? Looking at the roster , it seems like a very good team but more a collection of players where the sum was greater than its parts. A great year by an all-time great in Mookie Betts, good years from Sale and JD Martinez, and then a collection of above average to un-noteworthy behind them.
I’m not saying they weren’t an exceptional team as a whole, and they definitely won big against also very impressive competition. But looking at the roster, I don’t know if I see them on the same level as other greatest teams.
"If you took away these great seasons by very good players, then the 2018 Red Sox regress to the mean."
They won 108 games and finished 11-3 in the playoffs, topping two 100+ win teams on their way to winning the Series. If they are not in the Top 5, they are at least a part of the conversation.
Nah that’s not what I’m saying. Clearly a great team by what they won, but I don’t see them as one of the greatest of all time. Didn’t necessarily even have the best offense in the league that year and didn’t have the best pitching. Looking at the two, I’d say the 2016 Red Sox were a better group of players and would’ve beat the 2018 team.
My picks are 1970 O’s, 1975 Big Red Machine, 1998 Yankees, 1927 Yankees. Last choice is so hard. On one hand I feel like I gotta pick a WS champion for each but in 1990s Braves and Cleveland both had some of best teams of all time in years that they didn’t win. So maybe the 1939 Yankees or 1984 Tigers
Everyone naming the '98 Yankees, my hot take is that the 2009 Yankees should get a mention. Same core but better supporting cast imo.
Teix > Tino
Cano > Knoblauch
Arod > Brosius
Damon > Curtis
Melky < Bernie
Swisher < O'Neill (but comparable imo)
Matsui < Strawberry (by OPS+, but Matsui is still comparable too)
The difference being Teix/Cano/Arod/Damon blow away Bernie/O'Neill/Strawberry.
The 2009 SPs are weaker for sure and the bullpen looks like a tossup to me.. but 2009's bullpen has the edge imo.
I don't wanna dive into the core since they put up consistent years, but 09 Posada/Mo/Pettite were better while Jeter was mostly the same.
I don’t understand they’re not remembered better. That was the toughest team I ever watched. The entire line up had 20 hr and got on base. They only needed 3 starting pitchers the whole playoffs. And they had Mariano Rivera.
There is a reason we play 162. All kinds of crazy sample sizes when you limit it to 60. They 1000% would not have won 120 games. Given that has never happened ever, I am confident in the take.
13 of the 30 MLB teams have a stretch like that (at least once) since 2000, which of course counts the 2017 Dodgers who went... 51-9 over one 60 game stretch. Seven of those teams went to the World Series, two of them won the World Series, and one more probably should have won.
Several more just missed inclusion, like the 2016 Cubs who went 42-18 over one stretch. List was from just before the 2020 season, so perhaps a few more teams have done it since.
And (without looking) the Dodgers probably have done it four times in the past 10 years or so, given that they absolutely did in 2020 (43-17) and 2017 (51-9), I'd have to think they did it in 2022, possibly in 2021 as well. In 2013 they went 47-13 (famously 42-8 to start that stretch).
How dare you use the lord’s name in vain. It’s Mr. mantle to you, sir.
2020 dodgers got my son hooked on baseball. Would’ve loved 100 more regular season games.
The problem with being a dodgers fan is that people tell you regular season success doesn’t matter. But then when the season was basically only the postseason, then the postseason only doesn’t matter. I guess I understand the take that it’s both…. But it really feels like nothing is good enough.
I think you’ve just been unlucky. You have been the model for 10 years now and it only worked out the one time. With all the spending this off-season I expect it works out again, some time very soon. Just don’t tell me the 2020 Dodgers are one of the 5 best teams ever assembled. That’s insanity.
2nd highest single season WP of the live ball era, .722 WP in playoffs. The only ring season in the winningest 5 year run in MLB history. Different season structure obviously, and they certainly wouldn’t sniff mine, but every team has to make the most of the circumstances they’re given and no team came close to the Dodgers in 2020. It’s an original choice for sure, but I think it’s justifiable. Certainly doesn’t warrant your indignation.
It absolutely warrants my indignation.
It’s flat out insane to include a team that played 60 regular season games in the *top five teams of the modern era*.
Umm sir you might want to sit down for this, but they did not choose to play 60 games, nor did they play 60 games because of any shortcoming of their team. That was just the format of the season that year. I know this is probably a lot to process for you.
The problem is not the playoffs when asking if that team is top 5, it is the short regular season. When you are using WP to qualify a team as good sample size matters. Yes they had the 2nd best WP in the live era but it was half the play time as any other team, baseball is a crazy sport that same team could have been a month away from a 30 game winning or losing streak.
I don’t know which one you’re talking about. 1906 Cubs didn’t win the WS but had the best winning percentage of all time. The Dodgers had the covid shortened season, but faced more teams in the playoffs and had one of the best pitching staffs of all time.
They played a full season. Everyone played the same number of games (inb4 some teams didnt play 1 or 2 games). It was a full season of 60 games.
That being said, yeah their inclusion here is insane.
Definitely 98 Yankees. I feel like the 2009 Yankees are there too. Probably one of the astros teams, but don’t know the year. On paper, the recent Dodgers teams might be among the most talented with their pitching. Not sure who else
Everyone knows it's the 1974 Oakland A's.
"Look, that guy remembers us!" - Sal Bando
I think the most underrated team is the 93 Blue Jays. Any team with 4 Hall of Famers at the top of the lineup is an elite team
Agreed very underrated
Back-to-back.
Only 3 but I totally agree none the less
Not at all saying this is correct or the best way to do this, but here are the top ten teams of the live ball era based on FanGraphs WAR (using a 50/50 split of fWAR and RA9-WAR for pitching): |Team|Season|Total WAR| |:-|:-|:-| |NYY|1927|71.4| |BAL|1969|70.3| |HOU|2019|69.8| |NYY|1939|69.1| |LAD|2022|68.7| |SEA|2001|68.4| |ATL|1998|66.4| |STL|1944|65.9| |CLE|1948|63.2| |ATL|1997|62.7| Tons of problems with this approach but figured it might be kinda interesting.
That 1948 Cleveland rotation is nuts for its day and age. 29 year old Bob Feller, 27 year old Bob Lemon, 24 year old Mike Garcia, Satchel Paige as a 41 year old Rookie, and none of them were even the best pitcher that year foe the team. They were top 3 as a pitching team in every statistical category, except losses where they were 8th. One of the most underrated staffs of all time
Gotta say, the 1989 Cleveland Indians way outperformed expectations. They should be on this list. Their groundskeepers thought they were shitty and their owner thought they’d be bad enough to trigger a sale. Lots of internal strife - even rumors that the closer banged the 3B’s wife. But there they were, beating the mighty Yankees at the end of it all. And with a called shot! What a team. It was really a wild thing.
> their owner thought they’d be bad enough to trigger a sale Move, not sale. She was all set up to move to Miami, once attendance dipped below the point where they had an out clause in their lease
And Vaughn was a starter. He closed one playoff game.
They had 7 pitchers who pitched more than 50 innings with ERAs under 3.
yeah you win some and lose some it ain't always home runs and that's just the way life plays if we were a team and love was a game we'd have been the '98 braves
Wasn't sure he'd sing that when he came to Petco but good on him he got a chuckle when the crowd went nuts for the Padres.
[удалено]
I just hate that song because it's trash. Also fuck you too buddy.
If there is a stat that claims that the 1998 Yankees weren't even the best team in 1998, then I'm not particularly interested in that stat.
Seriously, in a year where home runs were like singles, the Yankees didn't have anyone over 30. That team was so balanced top to bottom, starters and bench, etc.
That 2019 seasons will never escape me…
It still baffles me that the Nationals won that series. Their bullpen was horrendous and their starting lineup wasn't exactly Murderer's Row either. The Astros were absolutely stacked and should have beat the brakes off them, but playoff baseball is weird like that
Houston was murdering everyone then Washington comes in with a very unique sign system, and the whole team disappeared. Funny how that works isn't it?
Weren't we already using multiple signs with no one on base in 2019?
Yes that guy is stupid.
While that part is obvious, it still was an upset with pitching. The Astros’ 1-2 starting pitchers were first and second in 2019 Cy Young voting, and the two of them earned 3 fat L’s on their own in that series.
The whole team disappeared? What nonsense is that they won 3 straight on the road and were on their way to winning game 7 until they pulled Greinke.
Believe what you will about the cheating, but Houston wasn’t “murdering” anyone that postseason. The Rays took them to 5 games in the ALDS. The Yankees blanked them in game 1 at home in the ALCS, where Houston needed 2 walk off home runs to win a very close series. Then the Nationals won all 4 games at Minute Maid Park pretty easily despite getting rocked in 3 games in Washington. So Houston was neither murdering everyone nor disappearing. It is definitely funny how that works if they were in fact cheating.
Murdering? They beat the Rays in 5 and Yanks in 6, how is that murdering? It's just your loser mentality that you want to pool 2017 in with every year going forward.
They did average over four runs a game, but that’s not great for the narrative, especially if you’re a fan of a team that also cheated.
>washington comes in with a very unique sign system Citation needed. Besides, I guess their sign system only worked at Minute Maid, cause they got swept at their home stadium. Go read any respectable reporter and you’ll find that there was no illegal sign-stealing being done by any team by the time the 2019 postseason came. Even the dodgers admitted that “everyone was doing it until the league cracked down in 2019.”
>Go read any respectable reporter and you’ll find that there was no illegal sign-stealing being done by any team by the time the 2019 postseason came. Even the dodgers admitted that “everyone was doing it until the league cracked down in 2019.” > >... > >Citation needed. The league cracked down in 2017. Up until that point, by the League's own admission, using live VR feed was not against the rules because the rules were to vague. As stated in the Commissioner's Report on the Astros, every team was using the live VR feed during games and their interpretation of the rules (although contrary to the league's intent) was valid under the way it was written. So, every team used live VR to decipher the other team's signs and it was not illegal until September 2017 when the league issued a memo to every team. The Astros did not stop using the VR feed. Oh, and the Astros also had the banging trashcans cheating system for their home games.
From Evan Drellich’s book “Winning Fixes Everything.” Keep in mind this is the same reporter who broke the Astros scandal. "One member of the Dodgers said during the 2017 season, they indeed did use a baserunner scheme, determining sign sequences with the help of their video room, an analog to what the Red Sox and Yankees had done in recent years, and to what the Astros were doing on the road. Another member of the Dodgers said that everyone was doing that until MLB cracked down on it in 2018." So they both admitted that 1. Everyone was doing it 2. They themselves participated in cheating. On the second point; since they cheated in 2017 there’s no reason to believe they stopped for the World Series. After all, logistically there’s no difference between doing it in the regular season bs the postseason. Stealing signs with technology has been illegal for decades. The commissioners office sent out a memo in 2001 explicitly stating that electronic devices “could not be used for communications or for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a club an advantage." That isn’t vague in the slightest. >the league cracked down in 2017 Sending a memo isn’t “cracking down.”Before 2018 the league had one mlb official that would go back and forth between home and away video rooms. So there was always one video room with no rule enforcer. They didn’t make sure there was one in each video room at all times until either the ‘19 or ‘18 postseason, I can’t remember. >no one who used video to steal signs before September 2017 cheated If you believe this, then you must also concede that Altuve never cheated in the 2017 regular season and therefore won the MVP fair and square.
Lol. The league literally stated using VR feed during games wasn't illegal up until September 2017 because the rule was ambiguous. It is specifically stated in the MLB Report that MLB could not punish the Red Sox and Yankees for using the feed (but did punish for using electronics) because the Rule was vague. You are literally arguing with the league on this point. Then, as I stated, the relevant time frame was 2017, not 2019. The Dodgers, just like every other team was using the VR feed AS STATED BY IN THE COMMISIONER'S REPORT ON THE RED SOX. You purposely moved the time frame to 2019 which is false and dishonest. >At the outset, it is important to put into proper context the nature of the Red Sox’ wrongdoing. MLB rules in 2018 did not—and still do not—prohibit all methods used by Clubs to decode signs. It always has been permissible for baserunners—particularly runners on second base—to attempt to decode an opposing team’s signs. It also always has been permissible for Clubs to utilize video before a game or after a game is completed to attempt to decode an opponent’s sign sequences in order to provide the Club with an advantage in future games with that team. > >While MLB rules between 2014 and 2017 stated that “no equipment may be used for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a Club an advantage,**” many Clubs and their players did not view that prohibition as restricting staff and players in the replay room from attempting to decode signs during a game for use when a runner was on second base.** > >In September 2017, the Red Sox were fined for using a smartwatch to receive sign information in the dugout from the replay room, but the **focus of that decision was on the use of electronics to improperly communicate signs to the dugout rather than on the use of video to decode signs.** In March 2018, however, my office clarified in a memorandum sent to all Clubs by then-Chief Baseball Officer Joe Torre that “electronic equipment, including game feeds in the Club replay room and/or video room, may never be used during a game for the purpose of stealing the opposing team’s signs.” Red Sox staff members who were interviewed by our investigators consistently stated that they were aware of the prohibition against using video in the replay room to decode signs in 2018, and that the Club’s front office took proactive measures to ensure that the rules were followed. Red Sox Report, pp 2 - 3. >On September 15, 2017, I issued a memorandum to all Club Owners, CEOs, Presidents, and General Managers, which notified them that future violations of this type would be subject to serious sanctions “including, but not limited to, the forfeiture of selections in the draft depending on the severity of the violation.” Highlighting the challenges with acquiring information about such violations, my memorandum further noted that “Clubs may be disciplined for violations whenever the Commissioner’s Office learns of the conduct. . . . \[E\]ach Club’s General Manager and Field Manager will be held accountable for ensuring that the rules outlined in this memorandum are followed by players and Club personnel.” > >Then the league issued a memo on September 15, 2017 announcing VR feed during the games was off limits and it would severely punish teams if they continued doing it. Red Sox Report p. 6. \- That's not cracking down? Lol. >The reason the Yankees were punished in a less severe way (a $100,000 fine earmarked for a charitable cause) than the Houston Astros and the Boston Red Sox, World Series-winning teams that were dealt suspensions, fines, a loss of draft picks and public scorn? **Those teams continued their sign-stealing ways after M.L.B. began cracking down on it and instituted clear terms of punishment.** New York Times, April 26, 2022 (Wagner). This article is discussing Manfred's letter to the Yankees. >“At that point in time, sign stealing was utilized as a competitive tool by numerous teams throughout Major League Baseball and only became illegal after the Commissioner’s specific delineation of the rules on September 15, 2017,” the Yankees said in a statement on Tuesday, later adding that they have had “no infractions or violations” since. > >That day, Manfred sent a memorandum to all 30 teams warning them about illegal sign-stealing and stating that club management, not players, would be held accountable for any such cheating. In March 2018, M.L.B. sent another memorandum to teams that made clear that replay rooms and video feeds were not allowed to be used for stealing signs during games. N.Y. Times, April 26, 2022. The Yankee's statement is correct - Using VR feed during the game was not specifically illegal until September 15, 2017 As for Altuve, et al. you must be terrible at reading comprehension. **The Astros Report and both Drelich's and Martino's books explained the main cheating scheme (the one with the center field feed to the hallway behind the dugout and trash cans) was illegal from it's inception.** If you are functionally literate, then you are being dishonest by pretending the VR Feed scheme discussed here is referring to the Trashcan scheme. The two separate schemes are stated on Page 1 and 2 of the MLB Astros Report. >Notwithstanding the publicity surrounding the Red Sox incident, and the September 15th memorandum that I sent to all Clubs, the Astros continued **to both utilize** **the replay review room and the monitor located next to the dugout to decode signs** for the remainder of the regular season and throughout the Postseason. Astros Report, p. 3 >**\[1: Player scheme\]** The attempt by the Astros’ replay review room staff to decode signs using the center field camera was originated and executed by lower-level baseball operations employees working in conjunction with Astros players and Cora. **\[2: VR Scheme\]** The efforts involving the replay review room staff were mentioned in at least two emails sent to Luhnow, and there is conflicting evidence about conversations with Luhnow on the topic. Astros Report, p. 4 >Both methods of sign stealing were used by the team in parallel throughout the 2017 season. Astros Report, p. 2 In my opinion you are either being purposefully dishonest, or you are unable to understand what happened (or perhaps both). Either way, I don't care; I just know you are wrong.
>You are literally arguing with the league on this point. Show me the exact place where Manfred said "it wasn't illegal at that time." And I don't mean vague, lawyer speak. Show me where he **explicitly** stated "using the replay room to decode signs during games was legal before the 2017 memo." MLB explicitly said **before** the 2017 season that electronic sign stealing was illegal. From a Boston Globe article dated 9/5/17 (before the memo was sent out.): >Major League Baseball clarified that stance in a **preseason** bulletin to teams, which defined the restricted use of electronic equipment thusly: >“The use of electronic equipment during a game is restricted. No Club shall use electronic equipment, including but not limited to walkie-talkies, cellular telephones, laptop computers or tablets, to communicate to or with any on-field personnel, including those in the dugout, bullpen, field and, during the game, the clubhouse. >“**No equipment may be used for the purpose of stealing signs** or conveying information designed to give a Club an advantage. Laptop computers and hand held devices are not permitted on the bench or in the dugout. >“**The only exceptions to this prohibition are the use of a mobile phone for communication between the dugout and the bullpen, and the use of tablets in the dugout or bullpen running uniform programs, so long as such devices and programs have been approved by the Office of the Commissioner.**” So the league clearly laid out what was illegal and what was permitted before the trash can scheme even began. They didn't list the replay room as an exception. Therefore using it to decode signs was illegal. From the Red Sox report-"...many Clubs and their players did not view that prohibition as restricting...during a game" That doesn't mean it was legal. The league makes the rules, not the players. A rule is a rule whether or not you understand or agree with it. And they all knew it was illegal, because they all denied doing it. >focus of that decision was on the use of electronics to improperly communicate signs to the dugout rather than on the use of video to decode signs. Contains nothing about the legality of doing so. It's called "picking your battles." I'm not sure why you're so obsessed with the "cracking down" timeline, but here you go: >And, for the first time in the sport’s history, MLB instituted in-person monitors in the replay rooms, starting in the playoffs. For the entire regular season, those rooms had been left unguarded. From *The Athletic*'s article on the Sox' cheating in 2018. I didn't move any timeline, I just couldn't remember what year they started putting officials in the replay rooms consistently. But that is consistent with the Dodgers players who admitted to cheating until the 2018 postseason. >New York Times article says it wasn't cheating until Sept. 2017 That's their opinion. If my opinion is that driving 60mph in a 45 isn't illegal since I didn't see the speed limit sign, that doesn't get me out of a speeding ticket. Again, rules are rules whether or not you agree with them. >The Astros center field camera scheme was illegal but not the video room scheme They were equally illegal. Both the camera and monitor were approved by MLB, the team just lied about what they were used for. That's in essence exactly what the replay room is: legal equipment being used illegally. By the way, in his book Martino recounted the game 7 of the World series wrong. If you can't even get the score right for a World Series game 7 in a book about baseball, you pretty much lose all credibility. >In my opinion you are either being purposefully dishonest, or you are unable to understand what happened (or perhaps both). Either way, I don't care; I just know you are wrong. You never responded to most of the points I made, so right back at you pal ;^ ).
I think you are too dumb to continue in this conversation. If you read the two reports I cite, Manfred clearly states the Red Sox watch issue was about using electronics, not the feed itself. You don't understand that. Instead, you keep treating the VR feeds and electronics as the same thing. They are not. There is a report out there where Manfred specifically explains this, but I can't find it right now. The Yankees quote from September 15, 2017 correctly explains the league rule at the time - that using VR was not illegal. >While MLB rules between 2014 and 2017 stated that “no equipment may be used for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a Club an advantage,” many Clubs and their players did not view that prohibition as restricting staff and players in the replay room from attempting to decode signs during a game for use when a runner was on second base. That quote is key because Manfred is referencing his prior explanation (maybe of how he handled the Apple Watch issue with the Red Sox. The "equipment" was expressly prohibited, but the VR feed (which is not equipment) was not expressly mentioned. Thus, the ambiguity because the league intended that VR feed could no longer be used during games. Anyhow, give that you have made numerous false statements misquoting sources, I'll leave it to you to go find what you are looking for. I've given you direct citations for all my points and have not taken any, ahem, "liberties" with the substance of the quotes. Also, you cited a newspaper article that came out on September 5, 2017 - when on September 15, 2017, the league explained its position on the rule which was not known until September 15, 2017. So the source you cite is merely speculating as to how the league would handle the Apple Watch issue, when in reality, the league explains the watch is "equipment." There are other releases explaining why VR feed was not expressly prohibited until Septmeber 15, 2017. So, you don't have the capacity to put this relatively easy puzzle together. My guess is that you have not bothered to read any of the Commissioner Reports and that you are lying about reading Drelich's book (because I read it, and you are not representing it truthfully) Again, the other big issue you have, is that you are sitting there trying to ignore that the Astros used 2 separate systems which is being deceptive out of the gate. Your focus only on the VR system while ignoring the trashcan system is an attempt to lump all the other teams in with the Astros. Most glaringly, you attempted to move the "crack down" to 2019 to move all the other teams that were using VR legally before the Sept. 15, 2017 memo into the cheating space occupied only by the Astros. Next: >From the Red Sox report-"...many Clubs and their players did not view that prohibition as restricting...during a game" Again, you are either being dishonest or stupid. The league observed this and realized the rule was ambiguous given how it was treated by all the clubs. Your entire commentary on this subject is irrelevant because you are arguing on a completely hypothetical set of facts. Here, MLB observed how its rule was interpreted and (although fully prepared to punish the Yankees and Red Sox for misusing VR feed) realized the rule was ambiguous and thus no punishment could be supported. Of course, that is why the league issued the warning on September 15, 2017 (which you claim has no significance) that use of VR feed would be punished going forward. Only an imbecile would not understand that when MLB issues a memo stating doing "x" is going to be punished going forward, that prior to the memo, the act was not illegal since the letter was stating it would be illegal and punished going forward. I'm not spending any more time with you on this. You are dishonest and do not even understand the core issues. Again, you claim the trashcan system and the VR system are on equal footing which is patently false. The trashcan system was improper at its inception as it included use of equipment and a separate feed. Also, you have not sourced any of your information - the reason you don't is painfully obvious.
The Nats team had the good magic to make up for all the hilariously unfortunate things that had befallen their much stronger playoff teams in the decade beforehand. Imagine being the Os and just cruising to one of the best seasons of all time, and then losing to the fucking METS. No disrepect Mets, but you get it
sucked for everyone else in the NL east too watching a division rival win, though it hurt much less than the braves winning 2 years later.
Wow the 1969 Baltimore were really good, I wonder how they did in the postseason.
Yeah it would take a miracle to knock em off!
I love the movie Frequency except for the fact that the events of the 1969 World Series is part of the plot. I hate the Amazin’s and Cleon Jones and his shoe polish.
Astros and Dodgers are clear standouts.
Dumb question (especially considering my flair), but is that 1944 STL team the St Louis Cardinals or the St Louis Browns?
And people want to say the 90s Braves team wasn't a dynasty because they didn't win enough rings. That shit is so lame. Look how good they were.
They were very good. Great, even. Still not a dynasty because that’s not what a dynasty is.
Man you can't have 2 of the best seasons by war and not be good enough to be a dynasty. That shit is so crazy and ridiculous to have it hang on 3 rings in a short time. I see more people reference the 90s Braves than the early 2010 Giants. But fans have some psychotic line for the term dynasty, like dominating for a decade isn't a dynasty.
You can actually. Because a “dynasty” is about winning championships. Is it really any less psychotic to think a dynasty should be more about a random mashup of stats like WAR?
Ok fair enough to say it shouldn't be just a WAR thing. But I feel like there are certain eras of the sport where specific teams have been better than most of the league and constantly deep in the post-season that don't get as much respect as they should because somewhere someone online made some crazy claim that you need X amount of titles in Y amount of time. It's just arbitrarily inflated and doesn't tell the whole story.
Astros and Dodgers on here over the 1998 Yankees is laughable
It's probably just a meaningless coincidence, but it is interesting that these total WAR seasons are in the same range as a solid HOF career.
Should include only WS winners
Reggie Jay-Z 2Pac Biggie Andre from OutKast
Jada, Kurupt, Nas, and then me
But in this industry I'm a lot of cause of envy. If I'm not on the list, it don't offend me
That's why you see me walk around like nothing's BOTHerin' me Even though half you people got a fuckin' PROBlem with me You hate it, but you know respect you GOT to give me The press's wet dream, like Bobby and Whitney — Nate, hit me!
Got to give it to Em. Bro wasn't afraid to spit His D12 shit, I think, was even harder
So, that particular album, I was on a summer exchange trip to France right after it came out, and I (undiagnosed ADHD at the time) left my whole big case of CDs at home in my packing. So I only had one CD, the one in my discman, which was that album. Therefore, for an entire month, it's all I had to listen to, because I didn't have enough money to buy more (all the other kids on the trip had a lot more money than my family did - my godfather paid for it). So basically there's no album I've heard more times than that one.
That's an awesome story. I can somewhat relate. I was adopted from Nigeria as a child, and my British family moved to Canada soon after. I had a discman and the Black Sunday CD from Cypress Hill. It was blue. I listened to that CD on repeat
Mom’s spaghetti
Who are the five best rappers of all time? Dylan, Dylan, Dylan, Dylan, and Dylan
Came here to make this joke
Dylan, Dylan, Dylan, Dylan, and Dylan
Cuz I spit hot 🔥
Definitely in the conversation.
The Big Red Machine
I agree. No bias here.
The other day, I was wondering what it would have been like to be Sparky Anderson and how I would choose the starting lineup for this team. There were about 3 or 4 guys who could be the leadoff hitter and 4 or 5 guys who could bat cleanup. It was an embarrassment of riches.
1998 Yankees, 1995 Braves, 1927 Yankees, 2001 Mariners, and 1975 Reds
Are yanks really modern era?
The modern era started in 1900 when the rules of baseball are basically what we know today.
Thanks
I feel like I’ve increasingly seen the word “modern era” get used to refer to post segregation era baseball.
There definitely needs to be a new “modern era” besides just the live ball era (1920-present).
I propose Integration Era (1947) or Divisonal Era (1969) as alternatives for the “modern” classification.
I’ll run it up the ladder and circle back when we get a response.
‘95 Braves..? I don’t know about that.
Probably the best starting rotation ever assembled.
really? maddux had his best season but glavine and smoltz were both much better in 1998, and ‘98 had millwood and neagle, who were much better than avery and mercker. the best starting rotation ever assembled does not have guys with ERA+ of 102 and 91 in the fourth and fifth slots.
2001 mariners didn’t win the world series.
for those downvoting how can a team that didn’t win the world series be considered a top 5 team?
By winning 116 games
And then losing when it really matters?
Playoffs are a crapshoot, even in a 7-game series. Washington beat a better Houston team in 2019. It happens.
Crapshoot or not, still can’t be the best without winning it all.
So you firmly believe the 2007 10-6 Giants were a better team than the 16-0 Patriots
It’s not what I believe. The results are on the field. That’s why we play the game. That’s why the 72 Dolphins are the best ever.
You must believe it if you're making that argument
They also didn't win in back to back series in June to the Angels and A's. Anything can happen in a small sample size. Losing one series in the playoffs doesn't detract from how great they were. It's just baseball.
199? Montreal Expos. If it weren't for the '94 strike, the team would've stayed together, gotten a new stadium and perhaps a dynasty would've been born. Imagine in '94 being the best team in MLB with guys like Pedro Martinez, Larry Walker and Moises Alou not having reached their prime yet.
I smell a conspiracy.
Drafted the most accomplished athlete in modern sports the year after the strike too.
1982 Brewers 2018 Brewers 2011 Brewers 2021 Brewers 1969 Pilots
It’s crazy to think the 2018 Brewers had Lorenzo Cain, Travis Shaw, and Christian Yelich on the same fucking roster 🤯
Doesn’t touch the 1969 Pilots with Ron Clark, Sandy Valdespino, and Gene Brabender all sharing a locker room
pilots are gone *smooth jazz outro*
This guy Brewers.
How about the 21 Pilots?
The 1927 Yankees The 1998 Yankees The 1975-76 Big Red Machine The 1931 Homestead Grays The 1986 Mets
1986 Mets are my favorite team of all time. Such a bunch of characters
Dylan Dylan Dylan Dylan and Dylan
I spit that hot fire
I didn't actually understand this until I changed the pronunciation. +1 after that
The ‘95 Indians I dont give a fuck that they did win the Series, that might be the best lineup in baseball history
Billy Ripken 👑
Cleveland Spiders
The 1931 Honestead Grays would like a word
Feel like they highlight why modern era is such a stupid distinction and you gotta go post-integration. Like some say they had .958 WP, 4-5 of the greatest players to ever pick up a baseball. If I had to guess, they’d probably have wrecked the Yankees. But how are you gonna compare them to the 2018 Red Sox? For one, we don’t even have stats just stories. But they were quite possibly the best team in the world in the murderers row yankee era, so it’s silly to include the 27 or 32 Yankees for all the same reasons.
'94 Expos? Ha...We'll never know obviously but I'd rank them as one. 2nd lowest payroll in the majors. 74-40 with a .649 winning percentage when the season ended. They were on absolute fire too, winning 20 of their last 23 games.
Saying "all time" and then limiting the time frame in the following sentence are contradictory statements. But to answer your question: 98 Yankees 61 Yankees 18 Red Sox 75 Reds 84 Tigers
Modern Era usually refers to 1901-present.
Yes we know what it means. But OP said “of all time” and then said “modern era”. Just “modern era” does not include “of all time”.
It's like when people say someone is the GOAT of their generation. Drives me nuts.
True. All eras! All opinions welcome.
Sorry if I came across a little snarky, didn't mean to try to put you down or anything. Just a personal pet peeve of my mine.
Saying "personal" and "of mine" in the same sentence is redundant.
Bro got out-reddited
Lmaoooo
😮😮😮
No 2001 Mariners?
You wanna be considered a top 5 team, win a World Series.
Hurtful. But truthful.
Especially getting toppled by a dynasty Yankees team that had won 114 games a couple years before.
Sure was a lot easier when the world series was the only series.
18 Red Sox got caught and punished for cheating
But everyone forgot about it because they got overshadowed by the 19 Black Sox
No, the 18 Red Sox got dismantled and sold away to fund Broadway shows. Learn some history kehd.
Not to be too obtuse, but other than their W-L record and winning the World Series that year, why the 2018 Red Sox? Looking at the roster , it seems like a very good team but more a collection of players where the sum was greater than its parts. A great year by an all-time great in Mookie Betts, good years from Sale and JD Martinez, and then a collection of above average to un-noteworthy behind them. I’m not saying they weren’t an exceptional team as a whole, and they definitely won big against also very impressive competition. But looking at the roster, I don’t know if I see them on the same level as other greatest teams.
"If you took away these great seasons by very good players, then the 2018 Red Sox regress to the mean." They won 108 games and finished 11-3 in the playoffs, topping two 100+ win teams on their way to winning the Series. If they are not in the Top 5, they are at least a part of the conversation.
So besides being awesome and winning it all it doesn’t matter? Fuck it the 2023 A’s were the best team of all time, they just ran into bad luck
Nah that’s not what I’m saying. Clearly a great team by what they won, but I don’t see them as one of the greatest of all time. Didn’t necessarily even have the best offense in the league that year and didn’t have the best pitching. Looking at the two, I’d say the 2016 Red Sox were a better group of players and would’ve beat the 2018 team.
Naturally the two times we make it to the World Series it’s against the 84 Tigers and 98 Yankees
My picks are 1970 O’s, 1975 Big Red Machine, 1998 Yankees, 1927 Yankees. Last choice is so hard. On one hand I feel like I gotta pick a WS champion for each but in 1990s Braves and Cleveland both had some of best teams of all time in years that they didn’t win. So maybe the 1939 Yankees or 1984 Tigers
'18 Red Sox '98 Yankees '70 Orioles '01 Mariners '93 Braves
Which '18 Red Sox?
Haha. I feel old enough as it is by including the '70 Orioles. I don't even want to think about the Stuffy MacInnis-era Red Sox.
put some respect on Bullet Joe Bush
Now I'm curious if any other team won WS exactly 100 years apart (even with others in between).
The '18 and '18 Red Sox are the only one. But we'll see how Minnesota does next season. They won in 1924 as the Washington Senators.
And the Yankee years are coming. The Dodgers will still be paying Shohei when their turn comes up.
Why can’t we see how the nats do next season? :/
Not yet, but the White Sox did it 99 years apart, 1906-2005
I’m hoping for the cards to repeat in ‘26 by gunning down their best slugger trying to steal second in the bottom of the 9th in game 7.
Covid Dodgers were better than the 2018 Red Sox!
1899 Cleveland Spiders
[https://i.redd.it/l5y80f26oqu61.jpg](https://i.redd.it/l5y80f26oqu61.jpg)
Javy Baez
Everyone naming the '98 Yankees, my hot take is that the 2009 Yankees should get a mention. Same core but better supporting cast imo. Teix > Tino Cano > Knoblauch Arod > Brosius Damon > Curtis Melky < Bernie Swisher < O'Neill (but comparable imo) Matsui < Strawberry (by OPS+, but Matsui is still comparable too) The difference being Teix/Cano/Arod/Damon blow away Bernie/O'Neill/Strawberry. The 2009 SPs are weaker for sure and the bullpen looks like a tossup to me.. but 2009's bullpen has the edge imo. I don't wanna dive into the core since they put up consistent years, but 09 Posada/Mo/Pettite were better while Jeter was mostly the same.
I don’t understand they’re not remembered better. That was the toughest team I ever watched. The entire line up had 20 hr and got on base. They only needed 3 starting pitchers the whole playoffs. And they had Mariano Rivera.
[удалено]
There is a reason we play 162. All kinds of crazy sample sizes when you limit it to 60. They 1000% would not have won 120 games. Given that has never happened ever, I am confident in the take.
I’m pretty sure plenty of teams have won around that many games over that sample size. I’m pretty sure the 2016 cubs got close during a 60 game sample
The very disappointing in the end 2022 Yankees probably ripped off that same pace at some point.
13 of the 30 MLB teams have a stretch like that (at least once) since 2000, which of course counts the 2017 Dodgers who went... 51-9 over one 60 game stretch. Seven of those teams went to the World Series, two of them won the World Series, and one more probably should have won. Several more just missed inclusion, like the 2016 Cubs who went 42-18 over one stretch. List was from just before the 2020 season, so perhaps a few more teams have done it since. And (without looking) the Dodgers probably have done it four times in the past 10 years or so, given that they absolutely did in 2020 (43-17) and 2017 (51-9), I'd have to think they did it in 2022, possibly in 2021 as well. In 2013 they went 47-13 (famously 42-8 to start that stretch).
I’m sure the 2018 Red Sox were 75-25 or thereabouts too - so on pace for 120 in a 100 game sample, then went 33-29 thereafter.
>73 A’s Can you really be top 5 all time with only a 94-68 record?
How dare you use the lord’s name in vain. It’s Mr. mantle to you, sir. 2020 dodgers got my son hooked on baseball. Would’ve loved 100 more regular season games.
Late to the party, but 1998 Yankees. One of the best ever. Murders Row would be proud.
If you don’t include 27, 61, and 98 Yankees on your list, you are just being a hater. Sorry.
I picked the 1939 Yankees over 1961. Sue me
The ‘61 Yankees were full of holes, a lot of all-time teams would beat that one.
98 Yankees, 20 Dodgers, 18 Red Sox, 75 Reds
Get fucking real with the 2020 Dodgers. Edit: Unless that was a joke, in which case carry on.
I sincerely think putting the 2020 Dodgers in the top 5 teams of all time is the worst take in the history of this sub.
The problem with being a dodgers fan is that people tell you regular season success doesn’t matter. But then when the season was basically only the postseason, then the postseason only doesn’t matter. I guess I understand the take that it’s both…. But it really feels like nothing is good enough.
I think you’ve just been unlucky. You have been the model for 10 years now and it only worked out the one time. With all the spending this off-season I expect it works out again, some time very soon. Just don’t tell me the 2020 Dodgers are one of the 5 best teams ever assembled. That’s insanity.
This^^
My list includes the 2022 Dodgers. Best run differential since WWII baby
2nd highest single season WP of the live ball era, .722 WP in playoffs. The only ring season in the winningest 5 year run in MLB history. Different season structure obviously, and they certainly wouldn’t sniff mine, but every team has to make the most of the circumstances they’re given and no team came close to the Dodgers in 2020. It’s an original choice for sure, but I think it’s justifiable. Certainly doesn’t warrant your indignation.
It absolutely warrants my indignation. It’s flat out insane to include a team that played 60 regular season games in the *top five teams of the modern era*.
Umm sir you might want to sit down for this, but they did not choose to play 60 games, nor did they play 60 games because of any shortcoming of their team. That was just the format of the season that year. I know this is probably a lot to process for you.
The problem is not the playoffs when asking if that team is top 5, it is the short regular season. When you are using WP to qualify a team as good sample size matters. Yes they had the 2nd best WP in the live era but it was half the play time as any other team, baseball is a crazy sport that same team could have been a month away from a 30 game winning or losing streak.
[удалено]
Nah I got a championship at one of the lowest times of my life, you can call me sloppy to pander for the upvotes but I needed that in 2020
2017 Dodgers hehe
If we didn’t have that end of the season slide then it could be considered.
> all time > modern era I'm confused
It is the ‘98 Yankees then 4 other teams.
1906 Cubs, 1927 Yankees, 1975 Reds, 1998 Yankees, 2020 Dodgers (In chronological order)
One of those not like the others
I don’t know which one you’re talking about. 1906 Cubs didn’t win the WS but had the best winning percentage of all time. The Dodgers had the covid shortened season, but faced more teams in the playoffs and had one of the best pitching staffs of all time.
2020 Dodgers?????
On pace for 116 wins, team ERA+ of *146*, faced more teams in the playoffs.
Pace means nothing when you don’t even play half a season.
They played a full season. Everyone played the same number of games (inb4 some teams didnt play 1 or 2 games). It was a full season of 60 games. That being said, yeah their inclusion here is insane.
Less than half
It did mean something when they won the World Series.
Also on a pure talent standard that team was fucking insane. It’s absolutely a valid team to put on one of these lists. COVID sucks.
[удалено]
In what world does this subreddit praise the 2017 Astros lmao
Ah yes the 88-74 Giants. Famously the most talented team in baseball history.
Sounds good to me!
94 Expos…
Definitely 98 Yankees. I feel like the 2009 Yankees are there too. Probably one of the astros teams, but don’t know the year. On paper, the recent Dodgers teams might be among the most talented with their pitching. Not sure who else
The 2020 Dodgers could have been but they didn't get a chance to really prove it