Greatest Dynasty Since 90s Yankees?

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by todeen

I would call them a dynasty. Obviously they were a little soft, they weren't Murderers Row or the Big Red Machine, but they had a core nucleus that was able to perform and produce on the biggest stage with dependability. That is a hard task. Developing a nucleus that can continually produce rarely happens. The Astros have had that, but without the desired results.

What's everybody's take on the current Dodgers team? Are they equivalent to the Astros?

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

I do not consider the Dodgers a Dynasty. They have been a great team for a long time but only a 1 hit wonder as of now

[jingram058]

As someone correctly stated above, they're the baseball version of the Buffalo Bills. Especially so if they lose this WS, and I hope they do. There's nothing to like about the Astros these days, except Dusty Baker.

[rats60]

A Dynasty needs to win as much as it loses over a 5+ year period. The Giants 3 championships in 5 years is the only Dynasty since the 1990s Yankees. The Ultimate Dynasty was 20 championships in 40 years 1923-1962 Yankees.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by rats60

A Dynasty needs to win as much as it loses over a 5+ year period. The Giants 3 championships in 5 years is the only Dynasty since the 1990s Yankees. The Ultimate Dynasty was 20 championships in 40 years 1923-1962 Yankees.

And that was back in the day when finishing on top of your league with the most wins actually mattered.

[isiahfan]

The Giants won 3 to the Astros 2 if I am correct...and didnt have as many total postseason wins....and FWIW many "experts" consider at least 2 of those Giants teams...(and some all 3)...in the top 5 worst all time WS champs.

If you are basing this only off of WS then yes...the Giants. If you are looking at longevity, consistency, fear of facing, etc.....I would take the 90's-00's Braves (How many straight PO appearances?) current Dodgers and Astros way before SF.

[mrreality68]

with this 2nd WS win and the # of times with the ALCS in the last few years it is close. But not yet. IF they win next year I would say yes if not I would say know

[packs]

Does it, though? It's been 5 years since 2017. The Yankees won 4 titles in 5 seasons and lost a 5th. Seems like a pretty big disparity between what are/may be considered dynasties.

[Mjramsey1]

Originally Posted by mrreality68

with this 2nd WS win and the # of times with the ALCS in the last few years it is close. But not yet. IF they win next year I would say yes if not I would say know

It is easy to argue, if a dynasty, the Astros would include an asterisk like Bonds HR record.

[campyfan39]

Dodgers would have been one if they had a half decent coach. Roberts is a baffoon who's complete allegiance to analytics has cost the team more times than I can count.

Originally Posted by mrreality68

I do not consider the Dodgers a Dynasty. They have been a great team for a long time but only a 1 hit wonder as of now

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by campyfan39

Dodgers would have been one if they had a half decent coach. Roberts is a baffoon who's complete allegiance to analytics has cost the team more times than I can count.

+1 Agree a different manager and they should have been a dynasty. THey had hitting, pitching, star power and good defense.