Not sure if this was posted before: Franchise bests/worsts: Baltimore Orioles

[PeteU]

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/24986957/franchise-bestsworsts-baltimore-orioles

Some interesting choices in there, although Brooks and Oriole Park at Camden Yards deserved some mention for their contributions to baseball history.

[BohKnowsBmore]

Interesting read. Thanks for posting.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MurphDogg]

The '69 team was so much better than the '70 team. To rank the '70 team ahead of the '69 team just because they didn't play the horseshoe encrusted Mets is silly.

[Frobby]

The '69 team was so much better than the '70 team. To rank the '70 team ahead of the '69 team just because they didn't play the horseshoe encrusted Mets is silly.

Meh. It's essentially the exact same team, with one more year of experience. I like the way the 1970 season ended much better. The Orioles were not going to be denied that year. I realize the '69 team had a better run differential, but it was so huge both years that the difference is largely irrelevant. I'll take the team that won when it counted.

[MurphDogg]

Meh. It's essentially the exact same team, with one more year of experience. I like the way the 1970 season ended much better. The Orioles were not going to be denied that year. I realize the '69 team had a better run differential, but it was so huge both years that the difference is largely irrelevant. I'll take the team that won when it counted.

I guess. The pitching in '69 was significantly better, 126 ERA+ compared to 116 ERA+. It may have been the same players, but almost to a man, the pitchers were better in '69. The offense was slightly better too. If both teams had won the World Series nobody would argue that the 1970 team was better. The '69 team lost 5 of their last 6 regular season games, swept the Twins in the ALCS and lost to a clearly inferior Mets team. Not a big deal, but I think the '69 team was the best team in Orioles history.

Also it is weird that the author couldn't be bothered do the 90 seconds of research to uncover that the Reynolds, Showalter high five failure happened on May 4th, 2012.

[byrdz]

I really hope Trembley is sticking around and finding reasons light up stogies.

[Tony-OH]

That was a fun article to read. Good stuff.

[MurphDogg]

That was a fun article to read. Good stuff.

I agree, despite my pedantic criticisms, I enjoyed it. I'm not sure I had seen Trembley's victory cigar. And I share the writer's affinity for the peacock bird.

[Frobby]

I guess. The pitching in '69 was significantly better, 126 ERA+ compared to 116 ERA+. It may have been the same players, but almost to a man, the pitchers were better in '69. The offense was slightly better too. If both teams had won the World Series nobody would argue that the 1970 team was better. The '69 team lost 5 of their last 6 regular season games, swept the Twins in the ALCS and lost to a clearly inferior Mets team. Not a big deal, but I think the '69 team was the best team in Orioles history.

Also it is weird that the author couldn't be bothered do the 90 seconds of research to uncover that the Reynolds, Showalter high five failure happened on May 4th, 2012.

I can't really argue with the bolded sentence.

[Beef Supreme]

How could any article about Orioles' ''Bests'' not include a section on Jim Palmer? Almost single-handedly, Palmer kept the Orioles as challengers for the division title from 1975-1978.

[weams]

The '69 team was so much better than the '70 team. To rank the '70 team ahead of the '69 team just because they didn't play the horseshoe encrusted Mets is silly.

Agreed. Luck plays in the post season.