Title: Best Team from the last 20 years?
LillyRocks - August 12, 2007 04:48 PM (GMT)
I think the 1998-2000 Yankees team. The other teams were great, but didn't do that well the next year. This Yankee team dominated for three years. (When I see didn't do good the next year, I mean they didn't play the same way the 1998-2000 Yankees did those three years in and out)
NateFizzle - August 12, 2007 04:49 PM (GMT)
I'm going with the Yankees, but the mid-90s Indians should have a spot on the ballot.
Baseballaholic - August 12, 2007 06:02 PM (GMT)
98 Yanks were solid, but 04 sox gets my vote. They just had the best clubhouse atmosphere and they swept the Cards and cameback against the Yankees.
YankeesDieHard™ - August 12, 2007 06:03 PM (GMT)
KeepTheFaith - August 12, 2007 07:42 PM (GMT)
yanks dynasty era
Red sox '03 should be up there though, they didn't win the world series, but they had an amazing team that year, and probably should have won, plus they were strong the next year...
LillyRocks - August 12, 2007 08:13 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Baseballaholic @ Aug 12 2007, 01:02 PM) |
| 98 Yanks were solid, but 04 sox gets my vote. They just had the best clubhouse atmosphere and they swept the Cards and cameback against the Yankees. |
In my opinion they had the best rotation of these past 20 years.
Crushed Optimism - August 13, 2007 07:10 PM (GMT)
The best team isn't always the WS team....
braveschopbraves - August 13, 2007 07:10 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Crushed Optimism @ Aug 13 2007, 12:09 PM) |
lol @ 2001 Mariners not being on the list.
*cough* 116 wins anyone? *cough* |
No they didn't make it to the world series. duh :wacko:
Crushed Optimism - August 13, 2007 07:10 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (braveschopbraves @ Aug 13 2007, 02:10 PM) |
| QUOTE (Crushed Optimism @ Aug 13 2007, 12:09 PM) | lol @ 2001 Mariners not being on the list.
*cough* 116 wins anyone? *cough* |
No they didn't make it to the world series. duh :wacko:
|
Yeah I realized that it was only WS teams on the list after I posted.
braveschopbraves - August 13, 2007 07:13 PM (GMT)
element doesn't agree
| QUOTE (element) |
| The Mariners were far from the best team in 2001. The Yankees and the D Backs were leaps and bounds above the M's. Lucky we didn't go to the world series, because the d backs would have swept the floor with us. |
Crushed Optimism - August 13, 2007 07:15 PM (GMT)
Ok, but I don't care what Ele thinks...
I'm not saying we were the best team ever or anything, but the Cubs and Mariners that won 116 games should be on the list (if it weren't just WS teams).
TheHugeUnit - August 13, 2007 07:17 PM (GMT)
1988 Yankees could beat any all star team thats how good they were. They feed off each other like no other team has. Their pitching staff wasn't all HOFers but they all had good competive minds and tried hard to out do the next. Their pen made baseball what it is today in that you need more than just one guy that can close the door.
zackboomer - August 13, 2007 07:32 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (TheHugeUnit @ Aug 13 2007, 02:17 PM) |
| 1988 Yankees could beat any all star team thats how good they were. They feed off each other like no other team has. Their pitching staff wasn't all HOFers but they all had good competive minds and tried hard to out do the next. Their pen made baseball what it is today in that you need more than just one guy that can close the door. |
so they made pitchers into even bigger pussies?
TheHugeUnit - August 13, 2007 07:35 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (zackboomer @ Aug 13 2007, 02:32 PM) |
| so they made pitchers into even bigger pussies? |
Well would you rather have BJ Ryan and 5 Jim Browers or a BJ Ryan, a League, a Downs and the rest?
NateFizzle - August 14, 2007 01:31 AM (GMT)
I'd rather have starters that can complete games.
zackboomer - August 14, 2007 01:47 AM (GMT)
Rockshu - August 14, 2007 03:16 AM (GMT)
I voted for the 92-93 Blue Jays, but we had the largest payroll in baseball at that time so that was probably why we were so good.
TheHugeUnit - August 14, 2007 02:26 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (NateFizzle @ Aug 13 2007, 08:31 PM) |
| I'd rather have starters that can complete games. |
It the Nl yeah, but you know how hard it is to complete games now in the AL? Theres really no weak spots in AL line ups anymore, pitchers have tow ork hard on every batter and players are taking more pitches. Unless you have like a knuckle curve and you have a team filled with young players like the D-Rays then your going to have to be on just about every pitch.
Marlinschamps03 - August 15, 2007 02:23 AM (GMT)
zackboomer - August 15, 2007 02:30 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Marlinschamps03 @ Aug 14 2007, 09:23 PM) |
| 03 Marlins. |
lol not even close. marlins were lucky to beat the cubs.
Marlinschamps03 - August 15, 2007 02:37 AM (GMT)
But we beat the Yankees too.
zackboomer - August 16, 2007 02:25 AM (GMT)
2001 Randy Johnson was the best pitcher of the playoffs in any of thoes years.
KeepTheFaith - August 16, 2007 02:50 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Marlinschamps03 @ Aug 14 2007, 09:23 PM) |
| 03 Marlins. |
gee..wonder what would make you say that....
Godzuki - August 16, 2007 11:15 AM (GMT)
I don't like that this list is exclusive to World Series winners. A 162 game sample is a much better indicator of how good a team is than a few series. Chris Shelton can hit 55 (I exaggerate) home runs in 7 games, and Albert Pujols can hit .130. That doesn't really mean anything..
Anyway, from the list, I took the Jays. But if I could take any team, it would be the Indians from about '94 to '97.
Element - August 16, 2007 05:11 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (braveschopbraves @ Aug 13 2007, 12:13 PM) |
element doesn't agree
| QUOTE (element) | | The Mariners were far from the best team in 2001. The Yankees and the D Backs were leaps and bounds above the M's. Lucky we didn't go to the world series, because the d backs would have swept the floor with us. |
|
Just the facts. There is no way we could have beat the unit and schill. It is odd to not think of a 116 win team as the best, but they just weren't built for the playoffs. The Indians even took them to 5 games in the ALDS, and they weren't anything special.