I found this list that Jason Guilbault put together a couple of years ago. He attempted to rank the greatest MLB teams of the last 100 years in order. Of course he considered each team vs. the contemporary competition which is the only rational way to do this.

Top 20 Major League Baseball Teams of All-Time - Fueled by Sports

His top team is the 1998 Yankees which is kind of hard to argue with. But he has the '27 Yankees at only no.14 which I think hurts the credibility of his list. That team went 110-44, swept the WS, and had a run differential of +376.

We can tend to think of the great teams having all star players at every position. How can a team that started Jose Siri in a significant number of games in CF be really great? But Guibault's no. 2 overall is the 1939 Yankees. Their first baseman, Babe Dahlgren, batted .235 and hit 15 home runs.

He has the 1970 Orioles at no. 5, a solid selection that I'll have to agree with. One of the best pitching staffs of all time. At no. 6 he has the 1986 Mets. I think I would put the Astros ahead of them. Those Mets finished 108-54 and had a run differential of +201 compared to the Astro's +219. And a lot of us remember how lucky that team was to first win the NLCS and then the WS (against a Red Sox team that was still under the curse, RIP Bill Buckner).

What do you guys think?

Not winning it in 2019 or 2021 stings just a bit.

W said:

---

it's very tough to compare teams from different eras.

I would go with 1969-to-present...when MLB split each league into 2 divisions and thus the playoffs became 2 rounds.

my criteria would be 100-win seasons and continued dominance in the playoffs. The list would include:

1970 Orioles
1976 Reds
1984 Tigers
1998 Yankees
2018 Red Sox
2022 Astros

teams like the 1975 Reds, 1978 Yankees, and 2009 Yankees would be in the next tier.

the issue with teams like the 1986 Mets, 2016 Cubs, and 2017 Astros --- they lost at least 5 playoff games on the way to the title

---

If Brantley would have been in the lineup its surmountable that we could have gone undefeated through out the playoffs ... but ill take the Win!

The 04 Red Sox on this list is a joke. They were an offensive juggernaut but didn't win their division, weren't in the top 10 in team ERA, had one starter in the top 30 in ERA, and were nearly eliminated by the Yankees. Basically they were a very good team that got hot at the right time.

For sure on the 2004 Red Sox. It might be one of his favorite teams but no way it should be on the list. You might be able to make a better case for the 2007 Red Sox. They won only 96 regular season games but went 11-3 in post season.

Harry Dunne said:

---

It sounds funny to say this, but if JV was not on the playoff roster this year, we would have been even more dominant.

---

I get these comments, but baseball is so weird that a single change can completely change the trajectory of a game, both good and bad. If Brantley is playing, how does that Jack with Penas absolutely dominating series? Where would he be batting?

If JV was out, how does that impact our rotation? JV sucked in the Seattle series and game 1 WS but did a pretty awesome job against NY and game 5 WS.

Baseball is so weird this way.

I'll throw the 1995 Braves into the discussion. Lineup and SP Staff was solid all around. They were able to beat the Indians that year who had a crazy stacked lineup.

W said:

---

it's very tough to compare teams from different eras.

I would go with 1969-to-present...when MLB split each league into 2 divisions and thus the playoffs became 2 rounds.

my criteria would be 100-win seasons and continued dominance in the playoffs. The list would include:

1970 Orioles
1976 Reds
1984 Tigers
1998 Yankees
2018 Red Sox
2022 Astros

teams like the 1975 Reds, 1978 Yankees, and 2009 Yankees would be in the next tier.

the issue with teams like the 1986 Mets, 2016 Cubs, and 2017 Astros --- they lost at least 5 playoff games on the way to the title

---

Although they "only" won 93 games in the regular season the '72 A's were pretty incredible and the postseason bullpen ERA record we beat was the one they set at 1.05. Here's an excerpt from that same article:

Quote:

---

Each of the five starters was under 3.00 in ERA led by Catfish Hunter with an ERA of 2.04. The other notables in the starting rotation included Blue Moon Odom and Ken Holtzman.

Rollie Fingers with his handle-bar mustache was the closer helping the pitching staff finish in the top three or better for the AL in each of the pitching categories.

---

They also mashed at the plate led by Reggie Jackson. Not sure how that team didn't get to 100 wins though.

Quote:

---

Not sure how that team didn't get to 100 wins though.

---

There was a two week players strike at the beginning of the season, the games missed were not rescheduled. The A's lost seven games from their schedule so they would have likely still fallen short of 100 Ws but their win total for the season would have likely been in the upper 90s.

Side note, the Rangers were still able to lose 100 games while playing only 154 in their first season in Arlington.

jkag89 said:

---

Quote:

---

Not sure how that team didn't get to 100 wins though.

---

There was a two week players strike at the beginning of the season, the games missed were not rescheduled. The A's lost seven games from their schedule so they would have likely still fallen short of 100 Ws but their win total for the season would have likely been in the upper 90s.

Side note, the Rangers were still able to lose 100 games while playing only 154 in their first season in Arlington.

---

OK that makes a little more sense and my point still stands, they were basically a 100 win team that led the league in homers behind Reggie and had one of the most dominant pens ever and starters with sub 3 ERA's.

JDUB08AG said:

---

Harry Dunne said:

---

It sounds funny to say this, but if JV was not on the playoff roster this year, we would have been even more dominant.

---

I get these comments, but baseball is so weird that a single change can completely change the trajectory of a game, both good and bad. If Brantley is playing, how does that Jack with Penas absolutely dominating series? Where would he be batting?

If JV was out, how does that impact our rotation? JV sucked in the Seattle series and game 1 WS but did a pretty awesome job against NY and game 5 WS.

Baseball is so weird this way.

---

Anything would have been an improvement over the black hole that was our DH spot. It was basically an auto-out. Hell letting the pitchers hit might have been a better idea.

You do realize for a good chunk of the season Yordan was the Astros DH, right?

BullSprig07 said:

---

2019 Astros bullpen is what kept that team from being truly dominant.

---

Yes and no. In the WS that year it was the starting pitching that didn't deliver, Cole and JV went 1-3. Grienke was outstanding in both appearances, Will Harris was arguably the most dominant reliever in all of baseball that year, including the playoffs except for 1 pitch in WS game 7 to Howie Kendrick. AJ called him the "panic button" because he could count on him to pitch out of any situation. Osuna and Pressly weren't exactly dead weight either.

Before that series, the Astros were absolutely the most dominant team all season, and had a historically great starting rotation. If they had won the WS, they would be among the top 10 teams of all time.

This Astros team was incredible. People might look back in 10 years and say "wow, all those guys used to be on the Astros?"

15. 1989 A's. Seems low. Dominant in season and 8-1 in playoffs. Star power all over the roster. LaRussa's best team of his career.

The Astros are on an all time great run. The 2022 squad had one of the greatest playoff runs ever. We will be telling our kids and grandkids about this Astros squad.