The best World Series of the decade was clearly 2001


With another decade of World Series complete, David Brown of Yahoo ranks them in order of greatness. The Yankees, of course, appear four times, ranking first, fifth, seventh, and eighth — the best, of course, being the 2001 Series. It ended on a painful note, but the two-run, game-tying home runs on back to back nights made that Series especially memorable. The 2009 team ranked fifth, though I think you just as easily could have swapped it with the No. 4 spot, the 2005 White Sox. The Subway Series finished at seventh, while the 2003 loss to the Marlins ranked eighth. The Red Sox historic 2004 victory ranked third, mostly for sentimental reasons (and I wouldn’t know where to rank it, since I didn’t watch an inning of it), but their 2007 victory was ranked the worst of the decade.

Categories : Asides


  1. Rebecca optimmist prime says:

    2001 is an all time classic

  2. JGS says:

    There is a good argument to be made that 2001 was the greatest Series ever, not just of this decade. It certainly was the best one I remember, but I don’t remember the 1991 series

  3. I like to think that the Yankees won the 2001 World Series three games to four. The comebacks were amazing and the GWB first pitch was incredible.

  4. Evil Empire says:

    2001 was such a heartbreaker … but it was an event worthy of classic baseball lore. Talk about a bittersweet memory.

    That’s the beautiful thing about 2009 though. It makes it easier for me to appreciate 2001 for what it truly was, one of the greatest world series of all time.

  5. Crazy Eyes Killa says:

    Putting BOS and CHI 3 and 4 for sentimental reasons eliminates all objectivity this piece could have had… makes no sense whatsoever to put sweeps in front of hard fought series

  6. Hobbes says:

    The decade is not over yet.

    • Evil Empire says:

      The best World Series of the decade 10 year period of time spanning from 2000 through 2009 was clearly 2001

    • theyankeewarrior says:

      what do you mean

      • rafael says:

        the decade technically runs from 2001-2010, since in our calendar system it’s generally agreed upon that there was no Year Zero.

        • YankeeJosh says:

          Very true, but that’s not historically how baseball teams are judged. Usually we speak of Team of the 60′s, 70′s, 80′s, 90′s etc which would be 1990 to 1999.

          So, given baseball history, I’m fin with considering the 00′s over now and next year starts the 10′s.

    • Pete C says:

      Thank-you, there should be some kind of official rule on rating the best of anything the last decade before said time period’s up.

  7. Riddering says:

    I can’t imagine a WS affecting me as much as the 2001 series.

    As to 2009′s: “It set up to be a classic but, like the rest of the 2009 postseason, we only reached the verge of greatness.”

    Not sure what that statement is supposed to mean exactly, especially with the use of “we” but I disagree anyway. With Lee’s near shutout, Damon’s double steal, Matsui’s child abuse, and Utley’s hair offensive assault this series provided plenty of memorable baseball. A series doesn’t have to reach 7 games in order to be great. (Maybe I’m just biased but to me the Yankees’ postseason series were the best. Two close games in the ALDS, a really good match-up against the Angels, and then a back-and-forth of pitching and hitting taking dominance in the WS.)

    Oh, and MVP: David Eckstein will never not be amusing.

    • steve (different one) says:

      i think that was more of a shot at the Phillies than anything else.

      everyone expected a battle of two heavyweights, but Philly didn’t quite hold up their end of the bargain. it was really the Yankees vs. Chase Utley.

      most of the Phillies’ other “stars” did little to nothing (Rollins/Victorino/Howard). Pedro got whipped in game 6. Lidge got pwned.

      it was (finally) supposed to be a battle between the best 2 teams in MLB, but aside from Lee and Utley, the Yankees held them down.

      • Bob Stone says:

        That’s far from fair. You left out some important details. I’ll give you one . . . Cliff Lee.

        • steve (different one) says:

          i mentioned Lee

          • Bob Stone says:

            True . . . my bad. You did mention him in your last line.

            Even so, just because Philly didn’t push the Yankees to 7 games doesn’t meean it wasn’t a very good (and, to some people, even great series).

            Let’s face it. Hot streaks and slumps during playoff series have a lot to do with luck (example: ARod).

            If every player on each side played to his average season stats during this series, it would have been a hell of a war. I still think the Yanks would have won in 7 in that scenario.

            But even as it played out, it was exciting, made you anxious to see the next game and it was a lot a great baseball.

            I’m a die-hard Yankee fan. Don’t misunderstand. But I think the Phillies gave the Yankes a hell of a fight even with the sub par performances of many of its stars.

            It certainly wasn’t as easy as it was in 1998 when the Yankees easily swept the Padres.

            • Bob Stone says:

              Oh – And I do think the two best teams from each league made it to the World Series this year.

            • steve (different one) says:

              i agree with you, Bob. it was a great series.

              let me try to say this better:

              from the POV of the general public, most of whom wanted to see the Yankees lose, probably felt like the Phillies let them down a little.

              from my POV, that’s mostly b/c the Yankee pitching shut down those guys, but that might not be how a 3rd party may see it.

              that’s all.

            • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

              Disagree. While the two best teams played I thought for the most part the Yankees dominated.

            • Boogie Down says:

              I think our three toughest post season series wins of the Dynasty were Atlanta in 1996, coming back from 2-0, Cleveland in 1998 being down 2-1 with the pressure, and Oakland 2000. Having Oakland tie the series, and going back to the west coast. These are just the years when we Won the Series. I would rank the playoff win over the Phils behind those.

  8. Boogie Down says:

    2001 was a great series, and we would have won it if NY had home field advantage. The 2009 win for me is special, because it’s kind of a reckoning of the past few seasons of being knocked out of the playoffs, and getting back on track against Boston. Hopefully this year marks the beginning of another big run, and isn’t just a one-off World Series.

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.