Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If the 2001 Mariners Had Won the World Series...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If the 2001 Mariners Had Won the World Series...

    ...would they be considered the greatest team of all time?

    We remember teams like the 2001 Mariners (as well as the 1954 Indians and 1906 Cubs) for winning a bunch in the regular season, but since they fell short in the postseason it doesn't seem right to call them the greatest ever. What if those Mariners had won it all though? Surely they would be in the discussion.

    It seems like every time the subject of "greatest team ever" comes up, it's always a Yankee team, like 1927, 1939 or 1998. It seems so perfect: baseball's greatest franchise producing its greatest team. As an expansion franchise without much historical glory, would people be inclined to give the Mariners less respect in such debates, or would it not matter?

    How would we view the Mariners franchise today if they'd won it? Would they be more "hallowed," so to speak? The only expansion team that gets treated like a grand old franchise is the Mets, and of course, that's mainly because of New York and the success they've had across eras. Would the 2001 Mariners be so legendary that we'd have more reverence for the team in Seattle? Would their national profile perhaps be higher today?

    What about legacies? Would Lou Piniella be seen as a future Hall of Famer for having managed that team? Would Ichiro Suzuki be seen as a no-doubt Hall of Famer (rather than a highly-probable-but-debatable one) for his incredible 2001 season?

    Thoughts?
    Baseball Junk Drawer

  • #2
    Not even close. The mid 90's Mariners teams were better.
    "No matter how great you were once upon a time — the years go by, and men forget,” - W. A. Phelon in Baseball Magazine in 1915. “Ross Barnes, forty years ago, was as great as Cobb or Wagner ever dared to be. Had scores been kept then as now, he would have seemed incomparably marvelous.”

    Comment


    • #3
      --The 2001 Mariners were a very good team that had a great season. If they had won the championship they would have a better argument for "greatest team ever" honors, but for me the true talent level of a team has to be a part of that. Having some extended success - multiple postseason appearances at least if not multiple championships - counts in my book. Having some truely great players helps too. I suppose that is where the mid-90s Mariners comment above comes from - A-Rod, JR and the Big Unit were a trio to match pretty much any in history. Unfortunately the M's didn't surround them with enough talent - especially pitching - to have a noteworthy level of success.

      Comment


      • #4
        First, I think Lou Pinella is considered a future Hall of Famer right now, regardless of the 2001 loss.

        But yes, if the 01' Mariners had won they would be one of the greatest. Their regular season was simply too good.

        They played 18 teams that season. And in their head-to-head records against all 18 teams, they had a winning record. That means no team got the better of them in the regular season. They were good against everyone, until the playoffs..

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by bluesky5 View Post
          Not even close. The mid 90's Mariners teams were better.
          Which mid 90's Mariners team came close to winning 116 regular season games and outscoring their opponents by 300 runs? From 1994-98 the Mariners had the follow W-L records:

          1994: 49-63 W-L (.438)
          1995: 79-66 W-L (.535)
          1996: 85-76 W-L (.528)
          1997: 90-72 W-L (.556)
          1998: 76-85 W-L (.472)
          Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 07-07-2012, 10:49 AM.
          Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

          Comment


          • #6
            I think the 1996 Mariners had more talent. Give them healthy Randy Johnson, and Moyer for the whole season, and they would have won well over 100 games I bet. Their 3 top starters for innings pitched all had ERAs well over 5, and they still won 85 games. Their pitching killed them. The '97 team was damn good too, maybe as good as the 2001 team. Griffey, A-rod, Edgar, Randy, Moyer. Six starters had a 120 OPS+ or over. A-rod had an off year which hurt them.
            Last edited by willshad; 07-07-2012, 11:32 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Having "more" talent is meaningless if it doesn't lead to more wins. The 2001 Mariners won 116 games. That's 26 more wins than the '97 team and 31 more wins than the '96 team. The 2001 Mariners outscored their opponents by 300 runs. They are one of the very few teams in baseball history to do that. The 1996-97 Mariners had more "big name" players but overall they were far weaker teams than the 2001 team.

              Code:
              .     RS    RA  Run Diff
              2001 927   627   +300
              1996 993   895    +98
              1997 925   833    +92
              Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 07-07-2012, 01:25 PM.
              Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

              Comment


              • #8
                I remember that season, having total confidence that the Yankees would beat Seattle in the ALCS, and that's exactly what they did. I don't think that team scared anybody in the postseason, despite compiling a lot of regular season wins. Also, Ichiro's MVP win was a disgrace. ROY, fine. But he was far from the MVP of the league.
                My top 10 players:

                1. Babe Ruth
                2. Barry Bonds
                3. Ty Cobb
                4. Ted Williams
                5. Willie Mays
                6. Alex Rodriguez
                7. Hank Aaron
                8. Honus Wagner
                9. Lou Gehrig
                10. Mickey Mantle

                Comment


                • #9
                  the Yanks were lucky to not get swept in the division series losing 2 straight at home and garnering all of 2 hits in game 3 0 the game which Je Giambi did not slide

                  Originally posted by GiambiJuice View Post
                  I remember that season, having total confidence that the Yankees would beat Seattle in the ALCS, and that's exactly what they did. I don't think that team scared anybody in the postseason, despite compiling a lot of regular season wins. Also, Ichiro's MVP win was a disgrace. ROY, fine. But he was far from the MVP of the league.
                  1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
                  2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
                  3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by GiambiJuice View Post
                    I remember that season, having total confidence that the Yankees would beat Seattle in the ALCS, and that's exactly what they did. I don't think that team scared anybody in the postseason, despite compiling a lot of regular season wins.
                    That doesn't prove anything though. Lots of initially-confident fans have watched their teams lose. What if the Mariners had beaten the Yankees and gone on to win the World Series? Would you be arguing that despite all they accomplished they really didn't deserve any consideration as the greatest team ever?
                    Baseball Junk Drawer

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      One thing that doesn't work in the 01' Mariner's favor is that after 2001 they didn't do anything. 2001 was the last postseason Seattle has seen.

                      So say they win in 2001, it's only one championship. What puts them above any other team that won just 1 championship? The regular season wins?

                      To be an all-time great team, they would need to win another championship (or two) or at least go deep in the post-season again.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        They were an extremely balanced team between hitting,starting and relief pitching,fielding, bench and baserunning.

                        Hitting: Team OPS+ of 117
                        Starting pitching: Team ERA+ of 117 with a team WHIP of 1.200. 3 200 IP starters with ERA+ of 115, 120 and 135.
                        Relief: Top 3 out of the pen totalled 180 IP with 0.900 WHIP
                        Defense: 104 runs saved above average by defense according to total zone!
                        Bench: Nearly full time utility player who played 2b, ss, 3b, and all three outfield spots and racked up 3.2 WAR, 115 OPS+ and 5 defensive runs saved. Bench posted 108 OPS+
                        Baserunning: Stole 174 out of 216 attempts (81%!!!) +25 net runs on the bases according to WAR. Quite rare for a team.





                        By the way, how many teams have scored 927+ runs with only 169 home runs or less, excepting perhaps 1930.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          sucks they didnt do it for a long time, but for that one season, that 2001 Mariners team was one of the best all around teams i've ever seen.

                          And quite possibly the best defensive team i've ever seen in my almost 30 years.
                          "all the mets road wins against the dodgers this year have occured at Dodger Stadium"---Ralph Kiner

                          "Blind people came to the park just to listen to him pitch"---Reggie Jackson, talking about Tom Seaver

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by willshad View Post
                            A-rod had an off year which hurt them.

                            i think most 21 year olds would like to hit .300 and score 100 runs


                            but yes for A-rod it was a bad year.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Speaking of balance, they had 9 position players and 3 pitchers who were at least 1.0 WAA or win above average, and 10 and 5 who were at least 0.5 wins above average, plus 2 more pitchers at +.4.

                              Also I noticed that they had only 10 losses by more than 4 runs. They lost by 10 runs once.

                              While on the win side they had
                              5 wins by 10+, and I count 18 wins by 7+

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X