I know Schilling isn't in the HoF but he's a HoF calibre pitcher and one of the greatest postseason pitchers in MLB history. I can't get too worked up about whether a team won 98 or 108 games. With the unbalanced schedule where u play teams in your division 19 times those records can be wildly skewed depending on the strength of your division. Seattle won 111 and couldn't even make it to the WS. The magnitude of what the 2004 team accomplished will always dwarf what the 2007 achieved. Btw the 2004 team won more games than the 2007 team.
Best team you have seen in each sport
- Thread starter Briancuse
- Start date
I know Schilling isn't in the HoF but he's a HoF calibre pitcher and one of the greatest postseason pitchers in MLB history. I can't get too worked up about whether a team won 98 or 108 games. With the unbalanced schedule where u play teams in your division 19 times those records can be wildly skewed depending on the strength of your division. Seattle won 111 and couldn't even make it to the WS. The magnitude of what the 2004 team accomplished will always dwarf what the 2007 achieved. Btw the 2004 team won more games than the 2007 team.
Knicks411
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,873
- Like
- 12,573
They need 8 more wins first!
Knicks411
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,873
- Like
- 12,573
Seattle won even more, 116.
If you have an emotional attachment to the 04 Red Sox, I get it, but I can't see them on any short list of best baseball teams ever. I don't like saying it, but my pick is prob the 98 Yankees.
It's just an opinion. There is no right or wrong answer.
A lot of times greatness is dependent on who you beat to win a championship. Beating the 1998 San Diego Padres doesn't exactly help the cause. That was one of the weakest teams to ever make a WS.
Knicks411
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,873
- Like
- 12,573
For sure not a great team. I remember Kevin Brown had a great year, Trevor Hoffman in the pen. They did win 98 games (as many as the 04 red sox) but I get it. The braves won 106 games that year. (jesus christ, that's a lot of wins. and they were 8 behind the yankees)
lol kaiser, the '98 padres sucked
Melancer46
Living Legend
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2011
- Messages
- 10,480
- Like
- 13,743
Without giving it TOO much thought:
NFL: The 16-0 Patriots
NBA: This year's Warriors
MLB: Last year's Cubs
NCAA Basketball: Probably the Okafor UConn team (Syracuse's title team was pretty much around when I started really paying attention to college basketball). This is a tough call though. I think the Joakim Noah Florida teams and the Hansbrough UNC teams are in contention too.
NFL: The 16-0 Patriots
NBA: This year's Warriors
MLB: Last year's Cubs
NCAA Basketball: Probably the Okafor UConn team (Syracuse's title team was pretty much around when I started really paying attention to college basketball). This is a tough call though. I think the Joakim Noah Florida teams and the Hansbrough UNC teams are in contention too.
2004 Red Sox not winning the division is irrelevant.
They won 98 games.
Their 9 hole won the AL batting title.
They had power up and down the lineup.
Their had 2 aces. Schilling and Pedro.
A good 3rd pitcher in Derek Lowe.
Good bullpen Flouke, Timlin, Embree.
It's by far the best WS Red Sox champion team of the 3 WS winners.
They won 98 games.
Their 9 hole won the AL batting title.
They had power up and down the lineup.
Their had 2 aces. Schilling and Pedro.
A good 3rd pitcher in Derek Lowe.
Good bullpen Flouke, Timlin, Embree.
It's by far the best WS Red Sox champion team of the 3 WS winners.
After they traded Nomar on 7-31-04 they went 42-18 in the regular season and 11-3 in the playoffs.
It was a dominant team.
Cusefan0307
Red recruits the ACC!
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Messages
- 46,965
- Like
- 135,520
Any Red Sox team listed as amongst the best ever the past 90 years is a joke. They haven't even won 100 games since Harry Truman was in office.
LOL
2017 Yankees don't beat the 2004 Yankees in a 7 game series.
04 Yankees won 101 games.
They won 98 games in 2004. They played .700 baseball after they got rid of a malcontent player in Nomar.
He was pissed from the A-Rod deal and was killing the team internally.
That team was an alltime team.
Cusefan0307
Red recruits the ACC!
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Messages
- 46,965
- Like
- 135,520
They were a great hitting team and their bullpen got hot at the right time. Outside of Schilling and Pedro that was a weak rotation. They gave up 100 more runs than the 98 Yankees while scoring 16 less. They gave up nearly 200 more runs than last years Cubs. I think at best the are the 4th best team of the past 20 years. I'd have them behind the 98/99 Yankees and last years cubs, but that's my opinion. I'm taking into account the entire body of work. I don't even think the 2009 Yankees were that good. That rotation consisted of CC and an aging Pettite and they won 103 games.
Knicks411
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,873
- Like
- 12,573
For college, I think you need to throw the Anthony Davis UConn team on here as well.
Back to baseball, if you just look at the last 20 years (which gets the 98 Yankees in play), if you sort by run differential, the 04 Red Sox are 22nd. Granted, that's just one metric. They're +181, the 98 Yankees are +309. 2001 Mariners +300. the 16 Cubs are #4. i could probably give you guys a million guesses and you wouldn't get #3.
It's probably worth pointing out, 2004 Pedro wasn't peak Pedro. he was good, but he had a 124 ERA+. That team did have an incredible offense though, first in runs scored, "only" 4th in runs allowed though.
The 2004 Red Sox did not have the batting leader in '04. That was '03. Mueller hit about 50 pts lower in '04. Lowe was such a good #3 that he lost his place in the rotation at the end of the year. He was pitching out of the pen at the start of the playoffs.
I think they are better than last year's Cubs.
Damon- Cabrera-Manny-Ortiz-Millar-Nixon-Mueller-Vartiek-Bellhorn.
Better lineup.
Derek Lowe had a bad 2004 regular season but he was a good pitcher.
Bullpen was solid the whole year that season.
I can hear argument for the Yankees 1998 team
But I think those Yankees-Red Sox mid 2000s were
Cold War Super power good.
I made the point earlier than it you only count the Red Sox after the trade deadline, they were a great team. But baseball doesn't work that way. I can't put a second place team as a all time great team.
both Red Sox and Yankee '77 and '78 teams were better than the '03 and '04 Red Sox yankee teams. just because you weren't around...The power those teams had was amazing. And the A's teams from the early 70's would take apart all of them.
Knicks411
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,873
- Like
- 12,573
That's a good stretch, but if we're talking best team of x years or whatever, well, the Yankees played 700 baseball all season in 1998. I was messing around with the play index; the Yankees in 98 of course had a million streaks where they were 42-18 or better over a 60 game stretch. Houston, Atlanta, and the Padres did it as well.
In 1999 4 teams had at least one 42-18 streak.
In 2000 just one.
In 2001 we had 2.
I won't keep going, just my point is going 42-18 isn't all that rare.
Pedro was owned by the 2004 Yankees.
He had over a 5 ERA in his 4 starts against them.
It spiked his ERA. He was still really good just not
Dominant that year. Schilling was the regular season ace that year.
The 2004 Red Sox are better than their metrics say.
The team took off when they got rid of Nomar.
It's not the best champion but it's one of the stronger ones.
Knicks411
Living Legend
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 13,873
- Like
- 12,573
I get that, there probably is something to that. But playing 700 ball over 60 games isn't the same as playing it over 162.
Pedro was real good in 2004, but he wasnt the guy he was in 2000 or 1999, and if we're talking all time team or whatever, that stuff matters.
I guess it also depends on what we're talking here; the Sox had a good pen, a great lineup, and a good 1-2 SP. That works well over a short series, and it's not going to do poorly over the long haul either, but it's hard to compare them to the 98 Braves or something. Are we talking winning a short series or winning more games over 6 months? I usually am talking about the latter.
Cusefan0307
Red recruits the ACC!
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Messages
- 46,965
- Like
- 135,520
If you have 2 really good starters and a good bullpen you are built for October. If you have great starters or a great lineup and a terrible bullpen you usually aren't going to win the world series. Just take a look at the 90's Braves and Indians. Their bullpens consistently blew it in October and I thought they were two of the scariest baseball teams I saw in that era.
