The greatest team in Boston sports history?

[BaseballJones]

Talking about the four major sports, which single team is the greatest of all time for Boston/New England?

Here are my candidates (though you aren't limited to this list):

2018 Red Sox - 108-54, went 11-3 in the playoffs, won the World Series
2004 Red Sox - 98-64, went 11-3 in the playoffs, won the World Series, breaking the 86 year curse
1912 Red Sox - 105-47, won the World Series
2004 Patriots - 14-2, won the Super Bowl
2016 Patriots - 14-2, won the Super Bowl
1007 Patriots - 16-0, lost the Super Bowl
2010-11 Bruins - 46 wins, 103 points, won the Stanley Cup
1971-72 Bruins - 54 wins, 119 points, won the Stanley Cup
1985-86 Celtics - 65-17, went 15-3 in the playoffs, won the NBA title
2007-08 Celtics - 66-16, went 16-10 in the playoffs, won the NBA title
1964-65 Celtics - 62-18, went 8-4 in the playoffs, won the NBA title

Which team is the best team ever in Boston sports history, and why?

 

[brs3]

The 2004 Red Sox wasn't going to lose another game in the postseason. You could've lined up a 3 game set with the 2018 team and the '04 team would've swept them. You could've lined up the Bruins after that, and the '04 team would've tossed on skates and beat them, too. Maybe the Patriots would've given them a run for their money, but I'm pretty sure the '04 team would've solved them, too.

 

[Ale Xander]

1949 Boston College hockey
21-1 on the way to a title

among “big four pro” teams probably the 1986 Celtics
40-1 at home
Best frontline in nba history
Just dominant in every way

most “important” teams were the 2004 Red Sox and 2001 Patriots

 

[pokey_reese]

I think we can safely eliminate the most recent Bruins and Celtics championship teams, and probably the 2016 Pats as well. All good, fun teams, but not in contention for 'greatest' across all seasons by any stretch, and those probably aren't even the greatest within their own respective sports.

 

[mikeford]

The 07 Red Sox were a buzzsaw and despite Cleveland taking them to 7 games in the ALCS (Cleveland being the 2nd best team in the league by final record that season), they swept the first round and swept the World Series EASILY. They deserve a mention.

 

[doc]

In 1007 weren't that Pats known as the Anglo-Saxons?

Correction they should be the Scots

 

[azsoxpatsfan]

The 2007 Pats was, I think, the best Pats team ever, with 2004-5 a close second. 2004 was of course the most important Sox team, but the 2018 team just absolutely dominated start to finish like no other team I can remember. For me it’s between those two, although I wasn’t around for the dominant Celtics or Bruins teams from the 60’s-80’s

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

I don't know how the 2007 Patriots can even be in the conversation on this one. Maybe if some adjective other than "greatest" were used but it seems to me that if we're talking about "greatest," there is at least one necessary but not sufficient condition and I don't think that team (unfortunately) has that box to check.

My vote would probably be the 2018 Red Sox. They were just an absolute buzz saw and everything lined up perfectly to make them greater than the sum of their parts. I was never much of an NBA fan in the day, so there may be obvious Celtics choices that are blind spots.

 

[ColdSoxPack]

1971-72 Bruins - 54 wins, 119 points, won the Stanley Cup

Hard to think of a more dominant team:

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Pick any early 1960s Celtics team

 

[ColdSoxPack]

Pick any early 1960s Celtics team

Before my time and I'm sorry I missed it.

 

[Ale Xander]

The 2007 Pats was, I think, the best Pats team ever, with 2004-5 a close second. 2004 was of course the most important Sox team, but the 2018 team just absolutely dominated start to finish like no other team I can remember. For me it’s between those two, although I wasn’t around for the dominant Celtics or Bruins teams from the 60’s-80’s

The 2007 Pats couldn’t even block the interior, tackle the speedy Eli Manning, or defend the helmet of a #4 WR.

 

[BaseballJones]

The 2007 Pats couldn’t even block the interior, tackle the speedy Eli Manning, or defend the helmet of a #4 WR.

Mankins was playing on a torn ACL.
Eli was in the grasp and three Pats' linemen were being held (Seymour was being literally choked).
The helmet catch was an absolute miracle, something Tyree could never ever do again if he had a thousand tries.

Now I'm upset all over again, LOL.

 

[johnmd20]

Mankins was playing on a torn ACL.
Eli was in the grasp and three Pats' linemen were being held (Seymour was being literally choked).
The helmet catch was an absolute miracle, something Tyree could never ever do again if he had a thousand tries.

Now I'm upset all over again, LOL.

It was Tyree's last NFL reception.

 

[snowmanny]

1971-72 Bruins - 54 wins, 119 points, won the Stanley Cup

Hard to think of a more dominant team:

I can think of one. The 1970-71 Bruins. They were the 2007 Pats before the 2007 Pats.
Edit- 57 wins, 121 points, goal differential of...192.

Pick any early 1960s Celtics team

Yeah I’ll nominate the 1964 Celtics.
But a lot of those teams don’t get mentioned because they had to win a game 7 or whatever. But I suspect they didn’t seem to mind going to a deciding game because, you know, Bill Russell wasn’t going to lose a deciding game.

But the most dominant team I ever saw, and I go back to 1967, was the 1985-86 Celtics. They pretty much only lost when they got bored. I still think they’re the best basketball team ever and the best Boston team of my sports watching era.

I wasn’t alive in 1912.

 

[Salem's Lot]

Mankins was playing on a torn ACL.
Eli was in the grasp and three Pats' linemen were being held (Seymour was being literally choked).
The helmet catch was an absolute miracle, something Tyree could never ever do again if he had a thousand tries.

Now I'm upset all over again, LOL.

And not to mention how they failed to start the clock after they measured for the first down. Time should have expired right after the Tyree catch.

 

[Pablo's TB Lover]

Maybe this is a separate college poll but in terms of great performance plus being a breakthrough maybe adding up to one of the best teams, 1998-99 UConn Huskies men's basketball went 34-2 overall (16-2 Big East), made their first Final Four, and defeated No. 1 Duke in the championship game. Although UConn themselves were ranked No. 3, they were a 9.5-point underdog and no basketball team in New England had won the title since 1947 (Holy Cross). Prior to this, you had the occasional comets just making the Final Four like PC a few times or UMass once.

 

[ColdSoxPack]

I can think of one. The 1970-71 Bruins. They were the 2007 Pats before the 2007 Pats.



Yeah I’ll nominate the 1964 Celtics.
But a lot of those teams don’t get mentioned because they had to win a game 7 or whatever. But I suspect they didn’t seem to mind going to a deciding game because, you know, Bill Russell wasn’t going to lose a deciding game.

But the most dominant team I ever saw, and I go back to 1967, was the 1985-86 Celtics. They pretty much only lost when they got bored. I still think they’re the best basketball team ever and the best Boston team of my sports watching era.

I wasn’t alive in 1912.

Agree on the 70-71 Bruins. I still remember the hot Sunday afternoon they got bounced out of the first round and we all went out and played street hockey in a foul mood after.

 

[Ale Xander]

Maybe this is a separate college poll but in terms of great performance plus being a breakthrough maybe adding up to one of the best teams, 1998-99 UConn Huskies men's basketball went 34-2 overall (16-2 Big East), made their first Final Four, and defeated No. 1 Duke in the championship game. Although UConn themselves were ranked No. 3, they were a 9.5-point underdog and no basketball team in New England had won the title since 1947 (Holy Cross). Prior to this, you had the occasional comets just making the Final Four like PC a few times or UMass once.

That team is not from Boston, and isn’t even the best basketball team from Storrs. (2002 Women)
But huge thanks for beating Dook.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Yeah I’ll nominate the 1964 Celtics.
But a lot of those teams don’t get mentioned because they had to win a game 7 or whatever. But I suspect they didn’t seem to mind going to a deciding game because, you know, Bill Russell wasn’t going to lose a deciding game.

The 63-64 Celtics had 8 Hall of Famers on the roster. 2/3 of the players that suited up for them that season are in the Hall of Fame. How many teams in any sport can boast that?

 

[E5 Yaz]

1971-72 Bruins - 54 wins, 119 points, won the Stanley Cup

Hard to think of a more dominant team:

Was wondering why they weren't on the opening list

 

[Ale Xander]

The 63-64 Celtics had 8 Hall of Famers on the roster. 2/3 of the players that suited up for them that season are in the Hall of Fame. How many teams in any sport can boast that?

62-63 had 9 I believe

 

[Ale Xander]

Was wondering why they weren't on the opening list

They were

 

[E5 Yaz]

They were

Huh ... suddenly I know what it must feel like to be GHoff

 

[jacklamabe65]

I have seen every team since 1963. Is funny that my favorite Pats team is 1976; my favorite Sox team is the 67 squad, and I LOVED the 71 Bruins and the 73 C's beyond reason.

 

[PC Drunken Friar]

That team is not from Boston, and isn’t even the best basketball team from Storrs. (2002 Women)
But huge thanks for beating Dook.

I'd say 15/16 UConn deserves a mention.

38-0. Average margin of victory 40 points (!!!!).

NCAA Tournement MOV...

52, 46, 60, 21, 29 and 31.

 

[lexrageorge]

1971-72 Bruins - 54 wins, 119 points, won the Stanley Cup

Hard to think of a more dominant team:

Almost as dominant as the 1970-71 Bruins . Closest "if only" team to the 2007 Pats, IMO. 1970-71 Bruins led the league in scoring, 3rd in goals against, first in power play goals and percentage, 2nd in penalty killing (and their 25 short handed goals led the league by 11). Team had 3 of the league's top 4 goal scorers (Espo, Hodge, and Bucyk) and with Orr occupied the top 4 in overall points, and had 6 of the top 8 point getters (Cashman and McKenzie trailed Bobby Hull and Norm Ullman).

I'd like to give the 2003 Pats a bit of a mention here; their defense was absolutely dominant that season following their disastrous 31-0 loss to Buffalo in the opener.

To me, it's between the 72 Bruins, the 86 Celtics, and the 2018 Red Sox. I'll give the edge to the '86 Celtics, where the only disappointment was not getting the chance to see them utterly destroy the Lakers in the Finals.

 

[ColdSoxPack]

Almost as dominant as the 1970-71 Bruins . Closest "if only" team to the 2007 Pats, IMO. 1970-71 Bruins led the league in scoring, 3rd in goals against, first in power play goals and percentage, 2nd in penalty killing (and their 25 short handed goals led the league by 11). Team had 3 of the league's top 4 goal scorers (Espo, Hodge, and Bucyk) and with Orr occupied the top 4 in overall points, and had 6 of the top 8 point getters (Cashman and McKenzie trailed Bobby Hull and Norm Ullman).

I'd like to give the 2003 Pats a bit of a mention here; their defense was absolutely dominant that season following their disastrous 31-0 loss to Buffalo in the opener.

To me, it's between the 72 Bruins, the 86 Celtics, and the 2018 Red Sox. I'll give the edge to the '86 Celtics, where the only disappointment was not getting the chance to see them utterly destroy the Lakers in the Finals.

I can go with the 86 Celtics too. I think they only lost 1 home game.

 

[Pablo's TB Lover]

That team is not from Boston, and isn’t even the best basketball team from Storrs. (2002 Women)

Talking about the four major sports, which single team is the greatest of all time for Boston/New England?

But huge thanks for beating Dook.

You're welcome (I'm not really a diehard UConn fan, my wife plays that role). Actually you are right about the women's team(s), it was specified four major sports and not necessarily men's/women's so my misread. In that case yes, the women's teams were definitely more dominant with respect to their competition.

But I digress: my pro pick is 2004 Sox. Their sphincters were making diamonds out of coal for 4 straight days and following the Yankees series they did not let down and promptly smoked the Cardinals as well. The total opposite of how the '07 Patriots season ended when they just folded under adversity.

 

[Was (Not Wasdin)]

I don’t know that I’ve seen a team play any sport as well as the 85-86 Celtics. Early 70s Bruins we’re a bit before my time, but of the teams I’ve seen it’s that Celtics team. 11-1 in the Eastern conference playoffs, and that 36-6 quarter against the Hawks in game 5 (after losing game 4) was like a message to everyone they were done fooling around.

 

[m0ckduck]

+1 for the 85-86 Celtics. They exerted a level of complete control over the sport that I've only seen since with the first half 2007 Pats— but they sustained it for a full season and playoffs without the semi-swoon that the Pats experienced.

My favorite thing about that team was that, on the rare occasions when a team managed to solve the starting 5 to some extent, KC would bring in second unit— anchored by Walton— and it would be a complete wipeout. It was something like a precursor to the Warriors small-ball line-up of death, but instead it was the complete-switcheroo bench lineup-of-death.

 

[nighthob]

The 1007 Patriots were fierce, if Thomas DeBrady hadn’t broken his foot in the jousting competition two weeks prior they’d’ve won the whole ball of pease.

 

[FelixMantilla]

1970-71 Bruins and the 2007 Patriots.

 

[GB5]

Regarding the Patriots, the 2007 team was probably the most dominant. They were slightly losing their edge the last 3-4 games, culminating in the loss to the Giants. Most metrics still have that team as one of the 3-4 greatest teams in NFL history. The 2003 and 2004 Patriots were both incredibly good, with my belief that 04 was their best team of the whole run. That two years stretch was outrageous. They had some thing like a 24-1 record at one point over the two years and finished something like 34-4 over the two years.

 

[snowmanny]

+1 for the 85-86 Celtics. They exerted a level of complete control over the sport that I've only seen since with the first half 2007 Pats— but they sustained it for a full season and playoffs without the semi-swoon that the Pats experienced.

My favorite thing about that team was that, on the rare occasions when a team managed to solve the starting 5 to some extent, KC would bring in second unit— anchored by Walton— and it would be a complete wipeout. It was something like a precursor to the Warriors small-ball line-up of death, but instead it was the complete-switcheroo bench lineup-of-death.

And if someone had noticed the true power of the three point shot with Sichting/Bird/Ainge/Wedman/McHale* that team would have been even more dominant.

*McHale would have required a little practice but would have been fine.

 

[Ale Xander]

And if someone had noticed the true power of the three point shot with Sichting/Bird/Ainge/Wedman/McHale* that team would have been even more dominant.

*McHale would have required a little practice but would have been fine.

Get Carlisle in there (and teach him the 3) and go with Bird as a stretch 5 like Jokic

 

[Daniel_Son]

The 1007 Patriots were fierce, if Thomas DeBrady hadn’t broken his foot in the jousting competition two weeks prior they’d’ve won the whole ball of pease.

A millennium of pure dominance.

 

[chrisfont9]

What does it mean for the 1960s Celtics teams where the NBA only consisted of 9 teams to start with? Do we depreciate their accomplishments? Or did that just allow for a greater, and now unmatchable, concentration of talent?

Also, this is purely relative to the competition levels at the time, right? Because I don't know how many of the 1975 Red Sox could get a hit off Eovaldi, even in their prime.

I vote '86 Celtics, 2018 Sox and '72 Bruins.

 

[azsoxpatsfan]

Regarding the Patriots, the 2007 team was probably the most dominant. They were slightly losing their edge the last 3-4 games, culminating in the loss to the Giants. Most metrics still have that team as one of the 3-4 greatest teams in NFL history. The 2003 and 2004 Patriots were both incredibly good, with my belief that 04 was their best team of the whole run. That two years stretch was outrageous. They had some thing like a 24-1 record at one point over the two years and finished something like 34-4 over the two years.

Yea, over that two year stretch they won an NFL record 21 consecutive games. Absurd

 

[Omar's Wacky Neighbor]

I can go with the 86 Celtics too. I think they only lost 1 home game.

Back then, I was dating a young woman who had almost unlimited access to really good seats (11 or 12 rows off the court, just inside the visitor baseline, opposite the visitor bench), so I saw a TON of games that year. That team made it look almost effortless.

My favorite memory: we were walking out of the first home preseason game, and Walton had put on a very quiet, low key clinic. Most of the nouveau riche in the good seats were grousing about what a disappointment Walton was in that game, but I was telling anyone who would listen that they had just raised another banner to the rafters.

 

[Buck Showalter]

The 85-86 Celtics is my vote...

They were incredible.

 

[bosockboy]

‘86 Celtics. Greatest NBA team ever.

 

[Marbleheader]

The only team I was certain would win a title, and didn't waver, was the 1986 Celtics. That's only focusing on the past 40 years, I guess that makes me the anti-Lamabe.

 

[Jordu]

The 07 Red Sox were a buzzsaw and despite Cleveland taking them to 7 games in the ALCS (Cleveland being the 2nd best team in the league by final record that season), they swept the first round and swept the World Series EASILY. They deserve a mention.

Best Red Sox team I ever saw. Took first place on April 18 and never looked back. First in the league in fewest runs allowed and third in most runs scored. Went 11-3 in the postseason.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Mankins was playing on a torn ACL.
Eli was in the grasp and three Pats' linemen were being held (Seymour was being literally choked).
The helmet catch was an absolute miracle, something Tyree could never ever do again if he had a thousand tries.

Now I'm upset all over again, LOL.

Mankins ACL heroism was 2011 (he played the ENTIRE SEASON on a torn ACL). Brock Lesnar-destroyer Stephen Neal tore his ACL on the first play of the game in 2007, and likely cost them everything.

For my lifetime, I think it's the 2007 Pats, followed by the 86 Celtics and somehow the 2018 Red Sox. How the hell did the 2018 Red Sox win 108 games and dominate the playoffs? Someone please look at that roster? A World Series contender? Absolutely. But 108 wins and dominating the playoffs, man everything went right. Maybe not as right as 2013, but that's another story.

Also, I feel the 2003-04 Patriots might be getting overlooked here. That team won TWENTY ONE straight games and Superbowls both years during that stretch. The 2004 team was a complete juggernaut, despite being down to their like 6th and 7th DBs by the time the Superbowl came around. I think you could credibly make an argument for the 2004 Pats.

I think we can safely eliminate the most recent Bruins and Celtics championship teams, and probably the 2016 Pats as well. All good, fun teams, but not in contention for 'greatest' across all seasons by any stretch, and those probably aren't even the greatest within their own respective sports.

I dunno, that Celtics team was pretty damned good. With some luck, they could have won 3-5 championships. KG was never the same and took 3 years to even get back to 90% of what he was after that innocent looking alley oop. The 2008 team wasn't as good as the 86 Celtics, but I think the 2009-10 Celtics had potential had they stayed healthy.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

Another vote for '85-'86 Celtics here. A couple of stumbles here and there mostly due to boredom. Never a doubt that they were going to win the title, the stupid Lakers ruined it by losing to the Rockets in the semis.

I put them a notch above the 2007 Pats because the 2007 Pats could not finish things off, but we'll never see another NFL team lay waste to an entire league like that team did for most of the season.

 

[staz]

The 1975 World Champion Boston Red Sox*


* with 2 good wrists on Jim Rice.

 

[staz]

The 2007 Pats couldn’t even block the interior, tackle the speedy Eli Manning, or defend the helmet of a #4 WR.

HE WAS IN THE FUCKING GRASP

And not to mention how they failed to start the clock after they measured for the first down. Time should have expired right after the Tyree catch.

Oh man. I did not know this. Really? (headslap)

 

[Soxfan in Fla]

It was Tyree's last NFL reception.

I’m not going to sleep well tonight with this new knowledge (to me).

 

[mauf]

I don't know how the 2007 Patriots can even be in the conversation on this one. Maybe if some adjective other than "greatest" were used but it seems to me that if we're talking about "greatest," there is at least one necessary but not sufficient condition and I don't think that team (unfortunately) has that box to check.

It’s all in how you look at it. If we’re comparing resumes, obviously not. But if we’re talking about who would win a hypothetical matchup, I’d take the 2007 Patriots over any team in the history of the sport.

My vote would probably be the 2018 Red Sox. They were just an absolute buzz saw and everything lined up perfectly to make them greater than the sum of their parts. I was never much of an NBA fan in the day, so there may be obvious Celtics choices that are blind spots.

This is where I’m at. The 2018 Red Sox and 1998 Yankees are the two best baseball teams I’ve seen. They’re in the discussion for best-ever like no Pats team besides 2007, or any Bruins team ever.

You don’t have any C’s blind spots. The only question is how you think about the ‘60s dynasty. I think of them as pre-modern, like the five Red Sox champs from 1903-18.