Narrow-mindedness gets annoying

The best team is the team that wins the World Series

I don't know if I can convey the wrongness of this statement, but I will try:

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

and

WRONG

2006 St. Louis Cardinals
83-79 (outscored opponents by 19 runs)
Team OPS+: 102 (barely above average)
Team ERA+: 97 (slightly below average)

Essentially an average team.

WRONG

2003 Florida Marlins
91-71 (outscored opponents by 59 runs)
Team OPS+: 107 (somewhat above average)
Team ERA+: 100 (exactly average)

A slightly above average team.

WRONG

2000 New York Yankees
87-74 (outscored opponents by 57 runs)
Team OPS+: 100 (exactly average)
Team ERA+: 107 (somewhat above average)

A slightly above average team.

WRONG

That's just the first 3 teams I thought of. Why don't people understand this? The best teams don't always fucking win. You can say that the team that plays the best in that series just about always wins, and usually that is the best team, but is it necessarily the best team? No, motherfuckers. It is not. WHAT IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS?! I am not saying that the team that puts up the best numbers should automatically be given the World Series trophy. If you win the games, you get the World Series trophy. But, you don't get the title of best team. If I'm a runner, and I run a 4:45 mile (and I've been running this time for a decade), and I go up against a guy who's been running 4:20 for years, and beat him 4:39 to 4:40, does that make me the best runner? No, because I overachieved and the guy who runs 4:20 could have been sick or it was just one of those days when unluckily he didn't have it. Shit like that happens. It's the same case in baseball. Now, as I've said, usually the best team or team that at least is arguably the best, wins. The 2005 White Sox were below average on offense with their 95 OPS+, but their pitching was unbelievable with a 123 ERA+ (!!!). The Angels had a slightly better run differential, but their ERA+ was 114 and OPS+ was 98. They were basically even on offense and noticeably worse with their pitching. The 2004 Red Sox, though I hate to admit it, those douchebaggian, overly facial haired child molesters were a really good team (111 OPS+ and 116 ERA+). They were better than the Yankees (114 OPS+ and 96 ERA+), and relative to their leagues, just about equal to the Cardinals, but we all know the National League sucks ass.

Now, I could go into even deeper analysis to evaluate these teams, but I lack the time. The point is, the best team or arguably best team does not always win. Anointing the World Series winner the best team is a very narrow-minded way of evaluating the teams.