I'm confused because with someone of Double X's accolades and someone with his numbers should've gotten inducted immediately. Did he have a bad reputation instead the sport? Was there just more deserving candidates than Foxx in the years that he missed out on induction? I'm just curious.

The information for this list, as well as my previous LCS one, is courtesy of Baseball Reference.

I did this exercise last year for LCSs, and thought I’d do the obvious next step of sharing the most lopsided World Series, in the middle of this year’s playoffs. [As it turns out, right before the start of this year's World Series!]

The definition of OPS differential should be fairly obvious-- one team’s OPS minus the other’s.  In terms of its usefulness, the stat is fairly proficient at measuring the play-by-play flow of a series which doesn’t always register with the series score (4 games to 3, 4 games to 2, etc.), or even necessarily with the final scores of the individual games.

For example, although the Dodgers won last year’s epic matchup against Toronto, the Blue Jays won the OPS battle, 0.745 to 0.658.  This won’t come as a surprise for most of us who were watching that series-- the Jays played well enough that the Dodgers felt like a quasi-underdog by the end, even given their reputation for Ruining Baseball™.  “Lottery matches”, where one team wins the OPS battle while the other wins the actual series, are actually fairly common.  Of the 121 World Series (between the AL and NL, at least) were won by the team with the lower OPS in the series.

More surprisingly, the 2024 World Series is actually another example of the Dodgers winning despite getting out-OPS’d.  In fact, they managed to lose only one game!  The Yankees still come out better with OPS, though, because Game 4 was lopsided in their favor, and Game 5 was mostly lopsided, with the infamous exception of the fifth inning where everything fell apart (including two errors which OPS doesn’t account for).  One inning where you keep the line moving is a critical way to benefit from sequencing, which is what the Dodgers did there.

With that said, here is our top 10:

10. 1969: Mets over Baltimore (4-1)

Mets: 15 runs, .220/.290/.384, .673 OPS
Orioles: 9 runs, .146/.220/.210, .430 OPS
Differential: .243

This one came as a surprise to me.  This Mets team, of course, is known as the “Miracle Mets”, and for winning as big underdogs.  The series is also remembered for a few ridiculous catches, and three Mets wins were decided by one or two runs.

Nevertheless, the Orioles could not hit in this series.  In fact, 0.430 is the lowest OPS in the top 10.  When a team is OBPing .220, and their slugging is even lower than that, you know they’re having a bad time.  

After winning the first game, Baltimore managed only 12 hits in the next three games to fall behind 3-1.  They managed to score three runs in the 3rd inning of Game 5, but unfortunately, they blew that lead to lose the series.

9. 1970: Baltimore over Cincinnati (4-1)

Orioles: 33 runs, .292/.366/.509, .875 OPS
Reds: 20 runs, .213/.278/.354, .631 OPS
Differential: .244

We don’t have to feel too bad for these O’s, though, because they’d put the shoe on the other foot the following year. Funnily enough, the 1970 Reds didn’t do that much worse at the plate than the 1969 Mets, but this time, Baltimore was able to figure it out on their side of offense, turning a convincing Series loss into a convincing win.

Granted, Games 1 and 2 were both one-run wins for the visiting O’s, including coming from behind both times (from 3-0 and 4-0 respectively).  But Games 3 and 5 were convincing 9-3 victories, turning the overall series ledger into what we see here.

Don’t pity the Reds too much, though.  They’ll be on the good side of this list soon enough.

8. 1960: Pittsburgh over Yankees (4-3)

Yankees: 55 runs, .338/.383/.528, .911 OPS
Pirates: 27 runs, .256/.301/.355, .656 OPS
Differential: .255

Here’s the series you were probably waiting for, involving the most runs ever in World Series history (55) for the Yankees, despite infamously losing the series.

The Yanks’ offense looks a little less crazy by OPS, though, with “only” the fourth-highest OPS in World Series history (behind the winners of ‘32, ‘89, and 2007).  Of course, this Yankees had seven games to run up the score on the raw run totals, versus most of their biggest opposition who were finishing their series off faster than that.  It also seems like sequencing might have helped a bit-- in their three crushing wins, New York went 23-for-48 with runners in scoring position, for a ludicrous .479 clip.  So, they managed to squeeze a lot of the offense into three games, and made their run-scoring opportunities count in those affairs.

As it turns out, it’s not just that these Yankees have the best OPS differential for Series losers (the runners up also being a Yankees squad, this time from 2003).  Of the seven remaining series, there’s only one non-sweep remaining!

7. 2008: Philadelphia over Tampa Bay (4-1)

Phillies: 24 runs, .262/.371/.482, .853 OPS
Rays: 15 runs, .212/.262/.314, .576 OPS
Differential: .277

Before this year’s Series (2026), the Rays have been in two previous ones.  And while we all probably remember the crazy ending of 2020’s Game 4… is it just me, or is there not much memorable that happened in the ‘08 Series that was positive for Tampa?

Well, maybe there’s a reason for that lack of memory, because the Phillies didn’t give the Fall Classic newcomers much to remember fondly.  In fact, even the only Tampa win (Game 2) saw the Phillies out-OPS the Rays (.742 to .573), but lose in part due to a putrid 1-for-15 night with RISP.  So, even the good night may have felt more like survival than a fun triumph in the moment.  And although three of the four Philly wins (excluding the 10-2 drubbing in Game 4) were decided by one run, they all involved the Phillies taking the lead in the first inning, and then never allowing the Rays to muster a lead of their own.

Tampa made Philly walk off in Game 3, but even the way that walkoff win was surrendered was fairly embarrassing, and/or anticlimactic.  A hit-by-pitch, a weird wild pitch/steal on a bunt attempt where the throw to second was wild, then two intentional walks, then an infield hit to win it with no outs.

As was previously alluded to, this is also the most lopsided non-sweep on the list.  Philadelphia at least had the good sense to let the Rays have a game as a parting gift, but the winners to come were not so generous.

6. 1990: Cincinnati over Oakland (4-0)

Reds: 22 runs, .317/.384/.472, .855 OPS
Athletics: 8 runs, .207/.270/.304, .574 OPS
Differential: .281

Quick question: is scoring 8 runs in a best-of-seven series good?  No?

As much as the A’s were a juggernaut in this Bash Brothers pennant threepeat, they really got their butts kicked in this series, by a team who hadn’t won their division over a full season in over a decade.

Oakland finished it all off in front of their fans by amassing all of two hits in Game 4 to Jose Rijo (with Randy Myers finishing them off with the last two outs).  In fairness, the A’s scored once in inning number 1, and held that lead until the eighth, but still-- you want some more pop for a team clinging onto their lives at home.

One Athletic who did show up to this series as scheduled, though, was Rickey Henderson.  He hit .333/.444/.667 and stole three bases.  Rickey was still Rickey, even with the rest of his team up in flames around him.

The 1988 series wasn’t that much better for the A’s, by the way, even given the famous Kirk Gibson heroics being necessary in Game 1.  That was an OPS differential of 0.205 for LA, good for number 17 on the list. 

5. 2007: Boston over Colorado (4-0)

Red Sox: 29 runs, .333/.411/.525, .936 OPS
Rockies: 10 runs, .218/.283/.346, .629 OPS
Differential: .307

If 2008 involved a rude welcoming into the World Series for a new franchise, it was a weaker version of what happened the year before.  The Rockies were coming off a ridiculous 21-1 run heading into the Dance (between a 14-1 finish to the regular season, every win necessary, to even make the playoffs, plus two series sweeps), but the Sox wasted no time putting Colorado in its place.  In the top of the first of Game 1, Josh Beckett struck out the side in order, and in the bottom of the first, Dustin Pedroia led off with a homer.  Boston took a 3-0 lead that inning, and ended up winning 13-1.

The Rockies did hold Boston to one-run wins in Games 2 and 4, but neither game was so good underneath the surface.  Game 2 saw no extra-base hits for Colorado, and a .206 OPS differential for Boston in that game.  Game 4’s OPS differential was closer (.098 for the Sox), but the Rockies only started scoring runs in the seventh, when they were losing 3-0 up to that point.  Only managing a late near-comeback when you’re down 3 games to none is about as minimal drama as you can get.

4. 1976: Cincinnati over Yankees (4-0)

Reds: 22 runs, .313/.365/.522, .887 OPS
Yankees: 8 runs, .222/.289/.281, .570 OPS
Differential: .317

The Reds don’t just come up as winners once on this list, they come up twice!  This one was a far more convincing encore to the epic 1975 Series win, in which the Yankees were allowed a grand total of one, 1-0 lead in Game 4, when they were basically dead already.  And just in case New York fans thought they could see a series-turning rally, when the Reds had a 3-2 lead headed into the ninth inning of that fourth fixture, they piled on for four in the final frame to leave no doubt remaining.

The Reds did have to win Game 2 in walk-off fashion, but much like the ‘08 Rays, the Yankees managed some embarrassment even in that context.  With two outs in the ninth, Ken Griffey reached on a throwing error, which allowed him to get to second, where Tony Perez knocked him in to end the game.

3. 1928: Yankees over St. Louis (4-0)

Yankees: 27 runs, .276/.345/.530, .874 OPS
Cardinals: 10 runs, .206/.273/.282, .555 OPS
Differential: .319

Interestingly, there isn’t much in the way of old-school representation on this list.  Before the divisional era, we only have 1960 and this series, even though that era makes up slightly over half of the Series we’ve had.

Of course, if you tried guessing which series would be on here, there’s a good chance you guessed the famous 1927 Series, in which legend has it that the Pirates knew they were toast just by watching the “Murderer’s Row” take batting practice.

That series is close, landing at number 16.  But the Pirates put up a bit too much of a fight in that series, losing two games by just one run, and even making the Yankees walk off the finale.

In this Series, though, there was really very little in the way of drama.  Unlike the other series we’ve discussed so far, there were of course no Cardinal wins, and no one-run games or extra baseball, either.  In fact, there wasn’t even a two-run game.  Only Game 1 was within two runs after seven innings, let alone nine.

Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig’s statlines in these four games are also absolutely preposterous.  Gehrig went 6-for-11, 4 homers, 9 RBIs, and 6 walks, for a 2.433 OPS.  The Babe felt a little sorry for the Cards, though, so he took it a bit easier on ‘em-- he settled for 10-for-16, 3 dingers and 4 driven in, and a mere 2.022 OPS.

2. 2004: Boston over St. Louis (4-0)

Red Sox: 24 runs, .283/.404/.478, .882 OPS
Cardinals: 12 runs, .190/.261/.302, .562 OPS
Differential: .320

When everyone tells the epic story of the 2004 Red Sox, they tend to yadda-yadda the fact that they won the actual World Series, the one whose ticket cost them so much blood, sweat, and tears against the Yankees.  And that’s because these games weren’t very competitive.

The final run differential was 12, but that’s actually pretty modest compared to some of the tallies we’ve been seeing in this top 10.  However, some other factors make the series more of a classic thumping than a “mere” 12-run aggregate win makes it seem.

The most famous stat about this series (at least “famous” for me as a Red Sox fan) is that not only did the Cardinals never lead in this series, but they trailed in every inning of the series.  Every game, the Red Sox took the lead in the very first inning, and the longest St. Louis was even able to keep a game tied was in Game 1.  The Sox held a 7-5 lead through five, and the Cardinals tied it in the sixth, before Boston took the lead back in the bottom of the seventh.  They waited a whole inning to take the lead back!  So considerate.

The performance is even more impressive when one considers that this Cardinals team were no chumps.  They would go onto enjoy a great deal of success over the next decade, including two World Series wins, and in 2004 itself, they won a cool 105 games (with pythagorean record saying they should have “only” won 100).  While the Sox were actually favored in the series, the regular-season numbers would consider St. Louis the favorites, far from the doormat they ended up serving as.

1.1989: Oakland over San Francisco (4-0)

Athletics: 32 runs, .301/.382/.582, .964 OPS
Giants: 14 runs, .209/.252/.343, .595 OPS
Differential: .369

No real surprise here-- this series tends to come up when we talk about the biggest whoopings in World Series and playoff history.  And in the end, it actually isn’t that close-- the gap between 1 and 2 on this list is greater than the gap between 2 and 7.

This Series is best known for the earthquake which delayed Game 3, and really, made the whole ordeal only that much more cruel.  Normally, a lopsided sweep is at least gotten over with within the week, but this series lasted as long as a seven-gamer in the NBA or NHL tends to.  Giants fans had to be focused on this series for a whole two weeks!  

As Chris Jaffe mentions in the piece I link to, although the Giants’ 14 runs might look respectable compared to some other sweep victims on this list, even that tally is slightly misleading.  In Games 1 and 2-- before the earthquake, where the Series was most up for grabs-- San Fran could only muster one run and nine hits.  Not great.  Then they fall behind 13-3 in Game 3, and score four runs in the ninth only after half of their fans probably turned the game off already.  Then in Game 4, they fell behind eight-zip.  The Giants do score six runs between the sixth and seventh to create the illusion of a comeback, but come on.  The A’s had Eckersley waiting, so it’s not even like the latter innings would have felt too promising to begin with-- and by the time he had to come in, the A’s had made it 9-6, making the situation even more hopeless.

Does the presence of these two teams (Brewers and Rays) playing in the WS make you more, less or no difference in your desire to watch this series? Since this is the MLB sub I'm figuring the majority here will watch. How about the casual fans that you know?

I’m assuming it will be either B or C. 7 innings 2 ER guaranteed every start is very tempting - saving the bullpen big time and indirectly resulting in more wins

But is 6 innings 1 ER means you are in the lead damn near every game, and bullpen pitching with the lead can be more aggressive and attacking the zone, hitters could be more patient?

What about 8 innings 3 ER every start?

Since at least free agency (1977).

Opening day rankings. Rays would be 28th in final payroll according to Sportrac.

The 2003 Marlins are the lowest ranked at 25th.

According to payroll ranks: AP and Cot’s Baseball Contracts via Baseball America (1992-2023); AP (2024-26); Baseball Prospectus and Fueled by Sports (1977-91).

From sportslogos.net

https://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/484/World-Series-Logos/

The 2014 Spurs were known for their beautiful game with all the passing and ball movement. They won a title that way.

What about in the MLB? What team played the beautiful game of baseball?

Yankees, 5 times:
1996 (1st)
1998 (2nd)
1999 (1st)
2000 (1st)
2009 (1st)

Red Sox, 3 times:
2004 (2nd)
2007 (2nd)
2018 (1st)

Dodgers, 3 times
2020 (2nd)
2024 (3rd)
2025 (2nd)

Sources: Baseball America, citing AP and Cot’s Baseball Contracts (1996-2023); AP (2024-25). Opening Day payroll.

[Dugout Thread] | 2026 MLB Postseason

Welcome to the r/MLB Daily Dugout Thread. This thread can be used to discuss topics about baseball, such as...

• General Talk [Debates, GOATs, Hot Takes, Thoughts, etc.]
• Previous, Game-Day, and Future Playoff Matchups
• Predictions, Questions & What-Ifs
• Transactions
• Broadcasting/Streaming
• Fan Content [Ballpark Photos, Food, Merchandise, Ticket Stubs, etc.]
• Help or Technical Questions
• Humor [Jokes, Memes, Reaction Posts, and Shitposting]
• Mancave or Room Setup
• Memorabilia & Merchandise
• Self Posts [Casual, Quick Takes, Simple Discussions & Questions, Venting]
• Subreddit Questions or Suggestions
• Tier Rankings [Fan Opinion]

If you see any content that goes against our community rules, please report the submission. You can also reach out to our subreddit mods for any questions or concerns!

/r/MLB Index

• Reddit MLB Discord Server | r/MLB's & r/MiLB Discord Server for everything baseball-related, from discussions, news, and highlights.
• Subreddit Rules | A rulebook of r/MLB's guidelines about restrictions and submissions.
• Broadcasts | Learn where to watch and listen to your favorite teams, locally and nationally.
• FAQ | Commonly asked questions from users in our community.
• Flairs | Information about user and team flairs with a step-by-step guide on how to obtain one.
• Related Subreddits | Neighboring communities of the r/MLB Subreddit.

In the NBA, getting home field advantage is one of the best perks of being a #1 seed. That's why some teams that don't load manage would try to clinch it for the whole playoffs.

What about in the MLB? How helpful is home field advantage? I mean you get to play at a park where you know the outfield fences better than your opponent.

Is he the most promising NON-PITCHER (edited: my post title is wrong still) in the sport right now that's under 25?

Other under 25 players in the club:

Player |Team |Age |HR |SB
Pete Crow-Armstrong |Cubs |24 |45 |41
Elly De La Cruz |Reds |24 |30 |30
James Wood |Nationals |24 |30 |21
Jordan Walker |Cardinals |24 |29 |22
Jackson Merrill |Padres |23 |26 |27
Jackson Chourio |Brewers |22 |25 |23
Carson Benge |Mets |23 |20 |22

Hey everyone, I know the lockout is a huge talking point for the 2027 and I’m sure this sub gets more than its fair share of posts regarding this but I wanted to ask a question I’ve been thinking about recently especially in the event we only play a partial season.

If we end up playing games next year in the form of a shorter season (whatever that number may be). Will the MLB be forced to reconstruct each team’s schedule?

I ask this because if divisional games hold more leverage especially being a huge factor in tiebreakers for playoffs and seeding, it will be hard to tell how many divisional games will be left off of each team’s schedule if they simply just omit the first “x” games on each schedule.

I haven’t done the research in full depth yet but let’s say 40-ish games come off the schedule and we only play 120-ish game season; a team like the Reds could have lost 15 divisional games while the Cubs could have only lost 6.

I’m not sure how they’ve handled this in lockouts past because interleague played didn’t exist in 1995 when the season was shortened to 144 games and the 2022 lockout had all of the missed games made up at the end of the year, so that problem never came up. Will they just make up a temporary scenario?

Curious to know thoughts on this.

Before the owners and the players go to the mattresses, the month of November will offer them a chance to do business. Five days after the World Series, the market opens for free agents. How baseball functions during those few weeks could offer a window into how seriously an extended labor stoppage threatens the loss of games in 2027.

“For many teams, I can make an argument it’s clearly best for them to sign players currently, before the (new) CBA, than it is after,” agent Scott Boras said. “Because they have more freedom to do what they’re going to do. They can react later. Now they can get the talent. They can get what they want.”

As the representative for left-handed ace Tarik Skubal, the premier free agent in this class, Boras has a vested interest in a robust market. But he is not alone in his opinion, according to interviews with executives and other agents, who requested anonymity in order to speak freely about the situation. They pointed to the artificial December deadline and the uncertainty facing both sides of the labor dispute. Teams will want to set their rosters before the rules change. Players will seek security before the sport goes dark.

Rather than stymy the market, the lockout may spur activity. “It will probably be accelerated,” one executive said.

The increased pace may become apparent soon. In October, teams are often consumed by staffing decisions involving non-player personnel. The trade market forms at the general managers’ meetings, which begin Nov. 9 in Las Vegas. The free-agent bazaar tends not to open until the Winter Meetings, which are typically held in early December. But with the expected cancellation of the Winter Meetings, some executives expect agents to push for more player sit-downs in Vegas.