- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Winning 100 games in an MLB season
Posted on 10/1/14 at 9:41 pm
Posted on 10/1/14 at 9:41 pm
Looking at this year's standings I noticed that there doesn't seem to be as many dominant teams as there once were. Obviously free agency in some ways has made it tougher to build dominant teams on a consistent basis, but even looking at the last 20 years there has been a huge difference.
From 1995-2004 teams won 100 games on 17 different occasions. In contrast, between 2005 and 2014 it has only happened 4 times. What is the reason for this? Is there more parity than ever in MLB? People seem to knock baseball for lacking it because of the free spending ways of baseball's top teams, yet the results seem to indicate otherwise. What does the MSB think?
From 1995-2004 teams won 100 games on 17 different occasions. In contrast, between 2005 and 2014 it has only happened 4 times. What is the reason for this? Is there more parity than ever in MLB? People seem to knock baseball for lacking it because of the free spending ways of baseball's top teams, yet the results seem to indicate otherwise. What does the MSB think?
6
Posted on 10/1/14 at 10:02 pm to LL012697
Wondered the same thing. I remember the Braves hotting that mark when i was younger
Posted on 10/1/14 at 10:05 pm to ToulatownTiger
Sure was wild when the M's won 116 games back in 2001. Most impressive regular season I can remember
Posted on 10/1/14 at 10:16 pm to LL012697
Giants won 100+ games in 93 and didn't make the playoffs.
frickin Braves
frickin Braves
Posted on 10/1/14 at 10:45 pm to LL012697
quote:
From 1995-2004 teams won 100 games on 17 different occasions. In contrast, between 2005 and 2014 it has only happened 4 times.
The Yankees aren't as good?
4 times from 1998-2004 alone.
Once since.
Posted on 10/1/14 at 10:46 pm to Walter White
quote:
Sure was wild when the M's won 116 games back in 2001. Most impressive regular season I can remember
Then got dick slapped by the Yankees (again).
Posted on 10/1/14 at 10:47 pm to LL012697
quote:
What is the reason for this? Is there more parity than ever in MLB? People seem to knock baseball for lacking it because of the free spending ways of baseball's top teams, yet the results seem to indicate otherwise. What does the MSB think?
Baseball has a ton of parity, people who claim otherwise are stupid. Small market clubs have gotten smarter about talent development and using the rules in place to retain that talent.
Posted on 10/1/14 at 10:58 pm to BayouBengals03
The Braves and Yankees do account for 9 of the 17 100 win seasons in that 10 year period. But you had plenty of other teams that did as well with the Astros, Dbacks, Giants, Indians, etc. It's not attributable to just one team
Posted on 10/1/14 at 11:02 pm to LL012697
Some of it is just randomness. A 99 win team is just as good as a team with 100, but that happens to be the dividing line for this. I think there are less really shitty teams and all the expansions teams are well established. Plus, with 30 teams, the teams have less potential to be as stacked.
Posted on 10/2/14 at 12:40 am to LL012697
True, but having 2 dynasties going on at once couldn't have hurt things.
Posted on 10/2/14 at 1:38 am to BayouBengals03
Low scoring era = more close games = less dominance
Also because of the lack of PEDs there are more injuries
Also because of the lack of PEDs there are more injuries
This post was edited on 10/2/14 at 1:40 am
Posted on 10/2/14 at 9:06 am to BayouBengals03
quote:
True, but having 2 dynasties going on at once couldn't have hurt things.
You're right, I guess the point I'm getting at is why we haven't seen any teams like the Yankees or Braves any more. I'm not complaining because I like seeing new blood in the playoffs, it just surprised me that there was such a disparity. I do think VKC makes a good point about the expansion teams of the 90's bringing some truly shitty teams and inflating win totals for some teams
Posted on 10/2/14 at 10:49 am to LL012697
The d-backs won 64 this year! 
Posted on 10/2/14 at 1:26 pm to lsu480
A small thing that might factor- a broader playoff format gives less incentives to teams that clinch early, to fight for the best record in the league longer.
Say you are at the 1st of September, but find yourself 4 games behind the best record in the league. You're in very good position to clinch your division soon, but you aren't likely to catch the front runner for best record, nor to fall into Wild Card hell. You focus on staying healthy and setting up for the playoffs, more than winning immediately.
Say you are at the 1st of September, but find yourself 4 games behind the best record in the league. You're in very good position to clinch your division soon, but you aren't likely to catch the front runner for best record, nor to fall into Wild Card hell. You focus on staying healthy and setting up for the playoffs, more than winning immediately.
Posted on 10/2/14 at 1:52 pm to LL012697
quote:
I do think VKC makes a good point about the expansion teams of the 90's bringing some truly shitty teams and inflating win totals for some teams
Definitely agree. Great point.
Posted on 10/2/14 at 4:21 pm to Walter White
quote:
Sure was wild when the M's won 116 games back in 2001. Most impressive regular season I can remember
I checked the paper every few days that year. I was just a kid, but I knew this was awesome.
This post was edited on 10/2/14 at 4:22 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News