Forbes beats Ilmago to the punch: Worst World Series Champions

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ys-forbesworstchamps102210

I find these topics dubious. A team declared as "The worst champion" is probably good with that. Better than being the best runner-up.

 

don't know how the 88 Dodgers aren't on that list.

 

I don't see any Cubs teams on there.

 

That was my first thought, too.

 

Who-whooo, '87 Twins are No. 1. We're going to win Twins, we're going to score. We're going to win Twins, watch that baseball soar!

They probably deserve it. But I'll say this. If that team played the 1927 Yankees and had homefield advantage with four games in the Thunderdome...they'd have beaten the Bombers.

 

Forbes has precious-little credibility left to lose, if their recent dorkapottomus, fantasyland profile
of Dan Snyder (omitting and/or pouring tons of makeup on warts) is any representative indication.

 

I don't know if the '85 Royals were among the worst to ever win it. I vote for just plain lucky.

And the Phils are on the list twice? Bullshit.

 

Lists suck.

 

@ The thread title

 

The 1997 Cleveland Indians were two outs away from being at the top of this list. Of all the Tribe teams from that era that almost won the title, the 1997 team was the worst and yet got closest.

They won 87 games and their ace was Jaret Wright.

 

The 2006 Cardinals get a bad rap. They were a decent team cruising toward 90 wins until they stumbled at the end of the year. They lost 10 of their last 14 (and seven in a row) to finish 83-78. Maybe not an all-time great, but better than they're remembered as.

 

People still read Forbes?