1975 vs. 1976

[Ltlabner]

My poll question comparing team 2006 to the past 5 years lead to another interesting topic (IMO).

Which Big Red Machine team was "better"? 1975 or 1976?

I'll leave it open to how "better" is defined.

[westofyou]

76 had better hitting, 75 had better pitching. The league was weaker in 1976, the Reds ate that up, destroyed both the Phillies and the Yankees

Therefore I enjoyed that year more.

[flyer85]

tastes great

less filling

[cumberlandreds]

Gee, another tough question. You can't go wrong with either one. I'll take 76 just because of how they cake walked through the post season. You can't do better than 7-0.

[maniem]

I would have to say '76, can it get any better than sweeping the yankees? If you think about it though, how great was it to beat two media darlings in the world series in back to back years? I'm sure the press absolutely hated that. I remember my dad telling me how they were constantly trying to compare Munson to Bench. I'll never forget Sparky's response, "Munson's name doesn't even belong in the same sentence as Johnny's." And how did Bench back up Sparky's comments? By completely destroying the Yanks and taking home the MVP. I wish I would have been around to see that, I wasn't born yet...I can't imagine what it would have felt like to be a fan during those years...

[Roy Tucker]

The '76 team played with more confidence and arrogance so I'll call it better.

The '75 team was still trying to overcome the underachievers tag after playoff and WS failures in the early 70's.

Once they broke through that barrier, they pretty well smoked everyone all through 1976, regular season and playoffs.

[Hap]

The 1976 team had a deeper bench with the additions of Bailey and Lum and the departures of Rettenmund and Crowley.

The 1976 team also got great pitching performances from the rookies Zachry, Sarmiento, and Alcala.

Foster, Geronimo, Griffey, and Concepcion were one year older and wiser than in 1975.

[Always Red]

You can't make me pick, so I won't.

It was the high point of my baseball watching and rooting career, and I didn't realize that until years later- of course one doesn't realize those kind of things at age 15. I'd love to be able to watch them again.

BTW- Foster played the entire year in 1976, he had played sparingly until Rose moved from OF to 3B in 1975. May?

[shredda2000]

1976...Just because they swept those dastardly Yankees

[Krusty]

75 season was special because of the 108 wins and probably one of the most dramatic World Series in the history of the game.

People forget this team was sputtering in the beginning till Sparky asked Rose to shift to third base in order to get George Foster's bat in the lineup. Once the change was made, this team took off.

[Tony Cloninger]

1976

Even with Bench's....really bad year, for him (great year for let's say a Barry Foote or a Greg Kendall)

Gullett did not start more than 23 games.

Billingham was below avg. McEnaney was bad.

I still think they gave up on Clay Carroll though....he would have been useful in 1977...... instead of having to put up with Dale Murray.

[RedsBaron]

Even though the 1975 BRM had the better record, 108-54, as compared to the 102-60 mark of the 1976 team, I would vote for 1976 as the better team.
There are arguments each way. In addition to having the better regular season record, the 1975 team had better pitching. While Zachary was a welcome addition to the starting staff in 1976, Gullett, Nolan and Billingham were all better in 1975 than they were in 1976. The 1975 bullpen was deeper, as Carroll was gone in '76 and McEnaney was ineffective in '76. The Reds team ERA in 1975 was 3.37 with 586 runs allowed, both marks ranking 3rd in the NL; in 1976 the team ERA was 3.51 with 633 runs allowed, ranking 5th in the NL in each category. Finally, Perez and especially Bench were better in 1975 than they were in 1976.
However, the 1976 BRM easily had the superior offense. Not only did the Reds score more runs in 1976 than they did in 1975, 857 to 840, they were totally dominant in everything in 1976, leading the NL in hits, doubles, triples, home runs, total bases, batting average, on base percentage, slugging percentage, stole bases, stole base percentage, walks, RBI, and runs scored. While Perez and Bench were not as good in 1976, the rest of the lineup was better in 1976, especially Foster and Griffey. The Pythagorean record of the two teams was somewhat closer, with the 1975 team 107-55 and the 1976 team 103-59. Add in post-season actual records (7-3 in 1975 and 7-0 in 1976) to the Pythagorean regular season marks and you get a 1975 record of 114-58 and a 1976 record of 110-59.
Three things tip the balance for me to the 1976 team.
First, while I cannot recall the record off the top of my head, since the 1976 Reds were never really seriously challenged, Sparky Anderson rarely started the eight regulars at the same time; when they did all start, the 1976 Reds had something like an .800 winning percentage.
Second, on the rare occasions when any kind of challenge was made to the 1976 Reds, they absolutely destroyed their opponents. Again, I cannot recall exact dates, but I believe that sometime in August the Phillies, who were running away with the NL East, defeated the Reds in the first game of a four-game series. Responding to the challenge, the Reds swept the remaining three games. Later that month the Dodgers had closed to around 6 games or so of the Reds. Again responding, the Reds swept a four game series against LA. Finally came the post-season--two series sweeps, the only undefeated team in post-season play since baseball went to divisions in 1969.
Third, the 1975 team was great and its players expected to win, but only with great difficulty and some luck did the Reds get by Boston in the World Series. In contrast, the 1976 team KNEW that it would win, played with absolute confidence and arrogance, and crushed all comers.
P.S. The 1976 Reds offense also lead the NL in strikeouts, yet they also lead in runs scored, providing an exhibit to add to the argument as to why strikeouts are not a big deal for an offense.

[Reverend Doo-Rag]

Originally Posted by Tony Cloninger

Greg Kendall

Fred Kendall. Isn't Greg Kendall some actor?

[redsmetz]

Originally Posted by cumberlandreds

Gee, another tough question. You can't go wrong with either one. I'll take 76 just because of how they cake walked through the post season. You can't do better than 7-0.

And that World Series win is part of a streak of nine consecutive World Series wins dating back to Game 7 of the 1975 WS (then 4 straight in each of the 1976 and 1990 Series).

[Tony Cloninger]

That's what i said.....Fred Kendall.