What is considered success for a MLB franchise? Is it simply finishing as the Wild Card? Is it finishing the season above .500? Is it only winning the World Series?
Are the Cardinals a better franchise in history than the Cubs? Are the Giants better than the Dodgers? Where do the Red Sox stand?he debate can be ended.
I decided to figure out how successful each franchise has been in their history. To do this I came up with a point system (this removed any possible bias on my part towards or against one franchise) and the following categories:
- three points for finishing in first place
- one point for gaining a Wild Card berth
- five points for appearing in the World Series
- ten points for winning the World Series
- two points for each 100+ win season
- one point for each 90-99 win season
- then I figured out just how frequently each team won the World Series (years in existence/World Series wins) and the more frequently the team won, the more points they got on a scale of 30 (most frequently winning the Series) down to 1 (never winning)
- I added up all those points and based on that came up with the rankings. If there was a tie, the team that has either been around for less years got the edge or if that was equal, the team that won the Series more frequently got the edge in the ranking.
It should be noted that due to the lesser number of teams and no playoffs except World Series back in the day, the older the franchise is, the more they benefitted. Also, the years in existence accounts for that team's entire existence, no matter the city they were in or the name they used (i.e. the Yankees years in existence include their days as the Highlanders and Orioles in the early 1900s).
Let's take a look at where each MLB franchise is ranked, starting with number 30 and working our way up to the most successful franchise in MLB history.