Top 20 Teams

[AstrosFan]

Here's how this works. You cast your vote for the top team of all time. Once we have 50 votes, I'll tally up the results and whoever gets the most is voted the number one team ever. Then we do the same thing for the second, and third, and so on, until we get 20 teams done. If enough people want to continue after that, we can, but I think 20 is enough. Also I would like volunteers to do a little research and write something about the number one team after it has been decided, the number two, and so forth, in the history forum.

Finally, I would ask that when rating teams, you compare them to their peers, and ignore the idea that players have gotten better over time, and thus current teams must be better. It's fine if you vote for a current team, but only if you truly believe they are the best compared to their peers. And remember to bold your picks.

I'll start off with the 1939 New York Yankees

Voting:

1939 New York Yankees 3
1961 New York Yankees 1
1998 New York Yankees 3
2001 Seattle Mariners 2
1927 New York Yankees 4
1976 Cincinnati Reds 1
1975 Cincinnati Reds 2
1906 Chicago Cubs 1
1902 Pittsburgh Pirates 1

[Francoeurstein]

1961 New York Yankees

[ElHalo]

1998 New York Yankees

[Yankee Legend]

1998 New York Yankees

[Seattle1]

2001 Seattle Mariners

[soberdennis]

I'll go with the obvious-1927 Yanks.

[SamtheBravesFan]

HankAaron, you need to get your brain checked if you believe that. :p

1939 New York Yankees

[Erik Bedard]

Hate to do it, but 1927 Yanks... at least they didn't beat the Sox!

[starkeeper]

The Big Red Machine!! Cincinnati Reds 1976

[redlegsfan21]

1975 Cincinnati Reds

[redraider]

1927 Yankees.

[AstrosFan]

Updated. I was hoping this wouldn't die out so quickly. It's meaningless, sure, but I thought we might at least get past round one.

[RuthMayBond]

As far as dominating their own league, I'll go with the '27 Yanks. No one's mentioned the second most dominant team yet

[85cards]

1902 Pirates

OK, maybe not the best of all time but REALLY dominated their league. The kind of team I love--speed, pitching and defense.

Chesbro, Leever, Phillippe, Doheny and Tannehill for a rotation

Beaumont hit .356 in the deadest of the deadball era. And 2 guys named Leach and Wagner weren't bad either.

[Cubsfan97]

How about 1906 Cubs? They deffinently dominated their league, too bad we lost it in the WS.

[RuthMayBond]

How about 1906 Cubs? They deffinently dominated their league, too bad we lost it in the WS.That's the one, although some people put a lot of emphasis on seven or fewer games, and there's something to that

[Wade8813]

Well, almost all of these are just going to be highly biased, but fortunately, the Mariners were good enought that I can actually pick them without looking like I'm spouting nonsense...:crazy

My vote: 2001 Mariners

[AstrosFan]

Well, I decided to update, even though no one seems to care anymore.

[RuthMayBond]

Well, I decided to update, even though no one seems to care anymore.I bet if we could move the thread to the History forum . . . ;) ;)

[Baseball Guru]

That's the one, although some people put a lot of emphasis on seven or fewer games, and there's something to that

Well it is hard to have the opinion of them being the one of the greatest teams when they didn't win the WS...

Tough choice for me between the 1927 Yanks and 1939 Yanks but ultimately I choose the 1939 team as the best all time...

btw, I think this is a great thread:)

[Chisox73]

Put me down for the '75 Reds.

[JeffB]

I vote for the 1998 New York Yankees. They won 125 games, including playoffs, and capped off their 114 regular season wins with a World Series title.

(In contrast, Seattle couldn't even cap their 116 win season in 2001 with an AL pennant).

The Yankees of 1998 had a great team, as opposed to individual superstars; guys who played selflessly as a team, like Paul O'Neill and Scott Brosius. Derek Jeter, of course, was on that team and would soon become a superstar, but was only in his 3rd year at the time.

[Baseball Guru]

I vote for the 1998 New York Yankees. They won 125 games, including playoffs, and capped off their 114 regular season wins with a World Series title.
.


Just wondering to keep the discussion up, do you feel the 1998 could have beat the "27" or "39" Yanks in a series? I would say the "98" team had one of itf not the best overall season but if they matched up vs one of those older teams, how do you think they would do?

btw, welcome to the site:waving

[JeffB]

Could the Yankees of 1998 have beaten the earlier Yankee teams of '27 and '39?

I think so.

The older teams' athletes were not nearly as well conditioned, played a slightly shorter schedule, and, with only seven opponents in each league, didn't have anywhere near the travel distance that teams do today (although they did it by train, so maybe the time was similar).

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Could a race car today beat a 1950's race car? Of course. And why is that?

Shorter schedules but many exhibition games during the season.

'27 Yanks

[Cubsfan97]

Yes the Yankees and Red SOx won what 114 and 116 game in '98 and 2001 but they did it in 162 games. The Cubs did it in 152 games. I think the 1984 Tigers deserve an honorable mention. AFter all they did start out 35-5. Thats 7 of 8, an .875 winning percentage. Thats unbelieveable.

[AstrosFan]

Updated. 18 votes in so far.