Best MLB Team of All Time

In tribute to the classic world series we just had. Thought I would make this thread. 4 options to choose from since these teams are usually regarded as the very best.

1927 Yankees (110-44 record) (4-0 in postseason)
Dominant "Murderers' Row" lineup featuring Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig, and sweeping the Pittsburgh Pirates in the World Series. Ruth hit 60 home runs, a single-season record that stood for 34 years, while Gehrig won American League MVP with 47 home runs and 175 RBIs. Team led the MLB in runs scored and lowest team ERA.

1939 Yankees (106-45 record) (4-0 in postseason)
The team is considered one of the greatest of all time, marked by a record-shattering +411 run differential and an incredible pitching staff and offense led by Joe DiMaggio in his MVP season

1976 Reds (102–60) (7-0 in postseason)
"Big Red Machine". Led the entire MLB in home runs, runs scored, batting average, and on-base plus slugging percentage. 7 of their 8 batters made the All-Star team. Also known for their excellent defense. 4 of their players won the gold glove that year.

1998 Yankees (114-48) (11-2 in postseason)
Known for their overwhelming dominance, winning 114 regular season games and 125 total games, which remains an MLB record. This team is considered one of the greatest in baseball history, featuring a powerful and well-rounded roster with a combination of rising stars like Derek Jeter and experienced veterans, along with a dominant bullpen led by closer Mariano Rivera.

Another autism thread from op :lol

[video=youtube;UMPn2IWUIPM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMPn2IWUIPM[/video]

[video=youtube;uS35-vAopSI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS35-vAopSI[/video]

[video=youtube;Sguk-uGfGBk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sguk-uGfGBk&t[/video]

[video=youtube;RfkLRvzj6no]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfkLRvzj6no[/video]

The '98 Yankees we're the most unstoppable force I've ever seen. They beat the Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, Jones Brothers Braves (who won 106 games thelmselves) in the WS very swiftly on top of a record setting regular season. Can't really do much about that. Probably the hottest season any team has ever had.

The '27 Yankees were different in that they had obviously the most dominant players of the era on the team. With a more diverse talent pool it's tough to argue against the '98 team.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15041489]The '98 Yankees we're the most unstoppable force I've ever seen. They beat the Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, Jones Brothers Braves (who won 106 games thelmselves) in the WS very swiftly on top of a record setting regular season. Can't really do much about that. Probably the hottest season any team has ever had.

The '27 Yankees were different in that they had obviously the most dominant players of the era on the team. With a more diverse talent pool it's tough to argue against the '98 team.[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure the '98 Yankees beat the Padres that year. Braves in a previous year.

On paper, the '27 & '39 Yankees seem like the most dominant teams, with the '98 team not too far behind. '76 Reds had all-time great hitting and top tier defense, but their pitching staff was kinda average, their '75 team actually had a better regular season and better pitching, but needed 7 games to beat the Red Sox, in '76 their batting was even better and they swept the entire postseason.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15041489]The '98 Yankees we're the most unstoppable force I've ever seen. They beat the Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, Jones Brothers Braves (who won 106 games thelmselves) in the WS very swiftly on top of a record setting regular season. Can't really do much about that. Probably the hottest season any team has ever had.

The '27 Yankees were different in that they had obviously the most dominant players of the era on the team. With a more diverse talent pool it's tough to argue against the '98 team.[/QUOTE]
You got your years mixed up bro, it was in '99 that they swept the Braves. They played the Padres in '98 who were the ones to beat the 106 win Braves that year.

An absolutely insane stat from that Yankee dynasty is from after they trailed the Indians 2-1 in the '98 ALCS through winning the '99 World Series, they went 18-1 over that timeframe. That is completely fvcking ridiculous :lol. They also reeled off 14 consecutive World Series wins as well, another insane stat.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15041492]I'm pretty sure the '98 Yankees beat the Padres that year. Braves in a previous year.

On paper, the '27 & '39 Yankees seem like the most dominant teams, with the '98 team not too far behind. '76 Reds had all-time great hitting and top tier defense, but their pitching staff was kinda average, their '75 team actually had a better regular season and better pitching, but needed 7 games to beat the Red Sox, in '76 their batting was even better and they swept the entire postseason.[/QUOTE]

Shit, you're right. I'm mixing up my Braves loses.

My bad. Only 1 World Series in the 90s is cool. I'm totally over it.

As for the thread, just based strictly off results, it's hard not to go with the '98 Yankees here. Including playoffs their record just blows away the '39 Yanks & the '76 Reds.

The '27 Yankees would have the strongest argument, but they played in an era with literally half the teams and before international or even black players were allowed in the league, and they only had to win 1 playoff series.

I understand roster argument is different, but results wise, they probably have the strongest argument for GOAT team of their sport, arguably even more than the '96 Bulls. Nobody in history has even won 120 games, they reeled off 125.

I wonder where the 2001 Mariners would fall in this discussion if they had won the world series that year.

116-46 record (ridiculous :oldlol:)
Led the MLB in runs scored and lowest team ERA

Funny enough they lost in 5 to the Yankees in the ALCS. Yankees pitching was too much for them or their hitters just hit a slump at a bad time.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15041500]I wonder where the 2001 Mariners would fall in this discussion if they had won the world series that year.

116-46 record (ridiculous :oldlol:)
Led the MLB in runs scored and lowest team ERA

Funny enough they lost in 5 to the Yankees in the ALCS.[/QUOTE]
What's funny is in that postseason the A's had the Yankees completely dead to rights and the Dbacks, despite it going down to the wire, completely dominated them in in the WS, yet they dispatched of the record setting Mariners with relative ease :lol

Let's not forget they also needed 5 games just to get out of the ALDS and lost one of the games 17-2.

1954 Indians, another potential all-time great team that couldn't get it done.

111-43 record. They literally had 3 of the 5 best pitchers in the entire MLB that season.

Probably the best pitching season ever by a team.

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15041500]I wonder where the 2001 Mariners would fall in this discussion if they had won the world series that year.

116-46 record (ridiculous :oldlol:)
Led the MLB in runs scored and lowest team ERA

Funny enough they lost in 5 to the Yankees in the ALCS. Yankees pitching was too much for them or their hitters just hit a slump at a bad time.[/QUOTE]

That's the tough part of analyzing baseball. I guess we still talk about the '07 Patriots as one of the greatest teams of all time but if Tyree doesn't make that catch? There's almost no argument.

Basketball is different of course but with baseball and football the little things matter and yea if one team is slightly locked in more for just a second anyone can lose a a game or a series to another hungry team. But as you know baseball is different because it's so mental and there are such ebbs and flows in general that if you get even the best team on the wrong weekend it doesn't work out them.

The 2001 Mariners were an incredible baseball team that just didn't get it done against the Yankees.

Great sport. Baseball might be back, right? This World Series turned a lot of heads I think.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15041505]That's the tough part of analyzing baseball. I guess we still talk about the '07 Patriots as one of the greatest teams of all time but if Tyree doesn't make that catch? There's almost no argument.

Basketball is different of course but with baseball and football the little things matter and yea if one team is slightly locked in more for just a second anyone can lose a a game or a series to another hungry team. But as you know baseball is different because it's so mental and there are such ebbs and flows in general that if you get even the best team on the wrong weekend it doesn't work out them.

The 2001 Mariners were an incredible baseball team that just didn't get it done against the Yankees.

Great sport. Baseball might be back, right? This World Series turned a lot of heads I think.[/QUOTE]
Football is just a different category, one fluke play goes against you and you can lose. The two most dominant NFL teams I've ever seen are the '07 Pats & '98 Vikes, and neither of them won the Super Bowl.

Losing 4 times in a best of 7 series is much more conclusive evidence that you don't truly belong in the GOAT conversation.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15041509]Football is just a different category, one fluke play goes against you and you can lose. The two most dominant NFL teams I've ever seen are the '07 Pats & '98 Vikes, and neither of them won the Super Bowl.

Losing 4 times in a best of 7 series is much more conclusive evidence that you don't truly belong in the GOAT conversation.[/QUOTE]

No necessarily though. One game where you have 2 guys on base and a line drive to the short stop that 90% of the time scores a run or maybe 2 means that you lose one of the games. Then in another a dude pitches out of his mind but you also have a couple of opportunities where the ball doesn't bounces your way. That's 2 of the 4 you've given up due to luck.

I mean look at the Jays. 18 things went wrong for them really with no fault of their own. Even though it's a 7 game series, each game is far more ticky-tack than a football game.

27 Yankees would have won this poll if we actually saw them in real time. It’s rare you will ever pick player and/or teams from a time period you didn’t see. Which is why 98 Yankees is the common pick usually from fans who saw them play. 27 Yankees were flat out nasty. Babe didn’t even win mvp yet he smacked 60 home runs which was more than any team in the AL. How many decades did it take for Maris to beat that? They had 6 pitchers with double digit wins and 4 with at least 18 wins. Lou smacked 173 rbis. Like come on man. What are we really talking about here?

If I eliminate the eye test, real time factor. 27 Yankees are the greatest team of all time. The way some of you act about Ohtani today I can only imagine if you were around for this team. Give me a damn break.


Also 86 Mets > 76 Reds on the all time list.

[QUOTE=GOBB;15041529]27 Yankees would have won this poll if we actually saw them in real time. It’s rare you will ever pick player and/or teams from a time period you didn’t see. Which is why 98 Yankees is the common pick usually from fans who saw them play. 27 Yankees were flat out nasty. Babe didn’t even win mvp yet he smacked 60 home runs which was more than any team in the AL. How many decades did it take for Maris to beat that? They had 6 pitchers with double digit wins and 4 with at least 18 wins. Lou smacked 173 rbis. Like come on man. What are we really talking about here?

If I eliminate the eye test, real time factor. 27 Yankees are the greatest team of all time. The way some of you act about Ohtani today I can only imagine if you were around for this team. Give me a damn break.


Also 86 Mets > 76 Reds on the all time list.[/QUOTE]

I agree with your '27 Yankees post. Almost 100 years later and people still bring up that team.

I believe the '76 Reds are the weakest team in the poll, not quite as dominant as the other teams because of their pitching. Mets had top tier pitching, their hitting wasn't anything crazy though, above average to good. Went with Reds because they had a more dominant postseason and their defense was better.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;15041515]No necessarily though. One game where you have 2 guys on base and a line drive to the short stop that 90% of the time scores a run or maybe 2 means that you lose one of the games. Then in another a dude pitches out of his mind but you also have a couple of opportunities where the ball doesn't bounces your way. That's 2 of the 4 you've given up due to luck.

I mean look at the Jays. 18 things went wrong for them really with no fault of their own. Even though it's a 7 game series, each game is far more ticky-tack than a football game.[/QUOTE]
Of course you can still outplay another team over the course of a 7 game series and still lose. I mentioned the '01 World Series before, that was legitimately a very one sided series where the Yankees needed 2 of the biggest miracle wins ever and got outscored by a whopping 37-14, yet they were THIS close to pulling it off. That would have honestly been the biggest 7 game robbery I've ever seen had Rivera closed it out.

Just to me personally, you lose one game on a once in a lifetime play like Tyree, it's far less conclusive to me than getting bested over a 7 game series like the '16 Warriors, '01 Mariners, the Bruins a couple years back. In reference to the Mariners, they just didn't look good the entire postseason, even before the Yankees waxed them.