The best teams that never won a World Series

[villain612]

I thought this would be an interesting and fun thread. A couple year window perhaps for consideration.

I'm sure the 2001 Mariners will make an appearance.

Anyway, we all know the playoffs are fickle. What are some of the best teams assembled that never managed to win a World Series?

To start it off, I really like the Cleveland Indians lineup in 1995.

Team record: 100-44 (shortened season)

They only had TWO guys who OPS'd under .800.

Albert Belle 1.091
Jim Thome .996
Manny Ramirez .960
Eddie Murray .891
Paul Sorrento .847
Kenny Lofton .815
Carlos Baerga .807
Omar Visquel .684
Tony Pena .679

[757690]

1975 Cincinnati Reds*











*according to Boston fans, or anyone else who only has paid attention to mainstream sports media talking about the 1975 World Series,

[gilpdawg]

1975 Cincinnati Reds*











*according to Boston fans, or anyone else who only has paid attention to mainstream sports media talking about the 1975 World Series,

I kind of disagree with that meme....I know it's popular among Reds fans, but I always saw it different. It was more "poor Red Sox, Curse of the Bambino" and the Fisk home was romanticized so much because it was all they had. And the moment with him waving it fair, which WAS really cool, on top of that legendary game, it what makes it so famous.

Poor Bernie Carbo is the one who gets hosed when you talk about game 6.

[RedsBaron]

When I think of great teams I think of teams that had a great core of players who put together a string of great seasons, such as the 1972-76 Reds with their core of Rose-Bench-Morgan-Perez. I don't really think of "one season wonders" quite the same way.
By decades, here is my list of best teams that never won a World Series:
1900s-The Tigers of Ty Cobb had a great core around Ty Cobb and won AL pennants in '07, '08 and '09-but no World Series.
1910s-The Giants of Christy Mathewson won NL pennants in '11, '12, 13-no World Series, and later grabbed a 4th NL title in '17-still lost the Series.
1920s/1930s-Just about every great team in these decades eventually won a World Series with their core players: The Yankees early in Ruth's reign, the Murders Row Yankees, the Gehrig-DiMaggio Yankees, the Walter Johnson Senators, the Grove-Cochrane-Foxx-Simmons A's, the Waner Pirates, several editions of Cardinals. While their core changed over the years, the most disappointing team with a great core over this time was the Cubs, who won NL titles in '29, '32, '35 and '38.
1940s-The Dodgers, closely followed by the Red Sox. The Dodgers won NL titles in '41, '47 and '49, lost a pennant playoff in '46, won 100 games but no pennant in '42---but no World Championship. Except for the '49 team, most of the core of those teams were gone by the time the Dodgers won a World Series in '55. The Red Sox of Ted Williams, et al, won the '46 AL title, lost a playoff in '48, lost the pennant on the last day of the '49 season--no World Championship.
1950s-Maybe the Indians. Cleveland did win the '48 World Series and much of the core of that team remained with Cleveland during the 50's, but Cleveland during the 50's was very good every season but only won one pennant, and the '54 Indians were swept in the World Series.
1960s-The Giants of Mays-Marichal-McCovey-Cepeda-Perry won but one pennant and lost the '62 World Series. Honorable (?) mention to the Twins of Killebrew, et al.
1970s-Several teams that decade that didn't win a World Series eventually got one the next decade with some of their core still there, including the Phillies, Dodgers and Royals. Such was not the case with the Red Sox, who had Yaz, Fisk, Tiant, Rice, Lynn, Evans, Eckersley and others that decade, but only the '75 AL title and heartbreak to show for it.
1980s-Maybe the Yankees.
1990s-The Indians. Cleveland was not only great in '95; the Indians had a great core for most of the decade, but only got AL titles in '95 and '97, no World Series wins.
2000-I actually need to think on this one.

[RedFanAlways1966]

I'll mention the 2001 Seattle Mariners (manager, Lou Piniella). Tied with the 1906 Cubs for most regular season wins. 116-46! Wow. And had the 11th highest payroll in MLB, Of course they lost to the Yank$ in the ALCS that season. The poor Oakland As finished 14 GB in the AL West standings with a measly record of 102-60 lol. In the few years prior to this season they lost some big stars named Randy Johnson, Alex Rodriguez and Junior.

[PuffyPig]

The playoffs are a crap shoot.

The difference between an elite team and a mere 90 win team in the playoffs is marginal at best.

[George Anderson]

1954 Indians

Won 111 games but got swept by the Giants.

[cumberlandreds]

I'm not sure I have the year right but the SF Giants of 1993 won about 103 games and didn't make the playoffs. They lost out on the last day to the Braves. I think that was the last year of the two division set up and no wild card team.

The 1969 Orioles were really good and lost out to the Amazin' Mets. Also the 1971 Oriole team had four 20 game winners and still came up short in the World Series. Those Oriole teams could have easily won three straight World Series.

[PuffyPig]

The Reds had the best record in the majors in 1981 and didn't make the playoffs.

[redsmetz]

I found this website when I went looking for the Orioles team that didn't even make the playoffs and won 100 games (1980 - one of two teams to win 100 games and not make the playoffs - 1993 Giants were the other). The piece is written by a Red Sox fan, so it's bent is understandable. It's an interesting read still.

http://firebrandal.com/2013/09/17/100-win-season-curse/

[RedsBaron]

I'll mention the 2001 Seattle Mariners (manager, Lou Piniella). Tied with the 1906 Cubs for most regular season wins. 116-46! Wow. And had the 11th highest payroll in MLB, Of course they lost to the Yank$ in the ALCS that season. The poor Oakland As finished 14 GB in the AL West standings with a measly record of 102-60 lol. In the few years prior to this season they lost some big stars named Randy Johnson, Alex Rodriguez and Junior.

Since I focused on teams with a great core that never won it all over the course of several seasons I should have mentioned the Mariners of the 90's when they had Junior, The Big Unit, A-Rod, Edgar Martinez, but never won a World Series. The 2001 Mariners were more of a one year wonder.
The only other MLB team to win 116 games in the regular season is the 1906 Cubs, who went 116-36 but lost the World Series to the cross town White Sox. The Cubs did win World Series in 1907 and 1908, at which time they decided that was enough.

[wolfboy]

2000-I actually need to think on this one.

Easily the 2001 Mariners. They won 116 games in the regular season. While they outperformed their pythag, they still would have been at 109 wins under that measure. Nothing to sneeze at. And while teams like the 90s Indians immediately come to mind, that's mostly for offense. The 2001 M's were extremely balanced: great hitting, great defense, and great pitching (albeit arguably without a true ace). At least the 1995 Indians reached the World Series. The 2001 M's didn't even get there.

[westofyou]

1941-42 Dodgers

1941  1st    100   54  .649   +2.5 
1942  2nd    104   50  .675    2

[RedsBaron]

Easily the 2001 Mariners. They won 116 games in the regular season. While they outperformed their pythag, they still would have been at 109 wins under that measure. Nothing to sneeze at. And while teams like the 90s Indians immediately come to mind, that's mostly for offense. The 2001 M's were extremely balanced: great hitting, great defense, and great pitching (albeit arguably without a true ace). At least the 1995 Indians reached the World Series. The 2001 M's didn't even get there.

I downgrade the 2001 Mariners because their greatness was so limited to that single season, greatness that I believe was a bit juiced as well. They were a good team obviously, but from 1998 through 2006 their run of winning percentages per season was .472, .488, .562, .716, .574, .574, .389, .426, .481. Were they really that great or were they just playing way, way over their head in 2001?
The 90s Indians didn't play at the level of the '95 team each season, but their run showed more consistency as a very good team, as from '94 through'01 they posted winning percentages of .584, .694, .615, .534, .549, .599, .556, .562. Those Indian teams featured a number of HOF worthy players whereas the 2001 A's had but one, Edgar Martinez.
I loved the BRM and its run from '72 through '76 is impressive: .617, .611, .605, .667 and .630. The '36-'39 Yankees had a great four year run of .667, .662, .651 and .702. The '28-'32 A's had a great five year run: .641, .693, .662, .704 and .610.
However the really impressive run was the '47 through '64 Yankees: .630, .610, .630, .636, .636, .617, .656, .669, .623, .630, .636, .597, .513, .630, .673, .593, .646 and .611. 18 straight seasons in which the Yankees posted a .600 or better winning percentage 15 times, and were barely below .600 in two of the other three seasons.

[RedsBrick]

Outside of 1995, put several of those Braves' teams in a hat and pull one out.