Part I

I decided to look a little deeper into lopsided playoff series to determine just how bad a series the Sox's four-game sweep of the Cardinals was from an aesthetic point of view. Red Sox fans, do not be offended. Consider it a compliment that your team won in such an overwhelming fashion.

I ranked every playoff series for every season (I only had World Series data for 2004) in the difference between the winner's and loser's stats in as many categories as I thought could be relevant. For batting I used runs per game, batting average, on-base percentage, slugging, and OPS. For pitching: ERA, WHIP, strikeout-to-walk ratio, strikeouts per nine innings, and home runs per nine innings. I also threw in unearned run average, the difference between runs and earned runs per nine innings, for some measure of defensive play.

The following are the top-25 most lopsided series based on these criteria all-time:

The 2004 World Series ranks ninth. It was fourth most lopsided World Series of all time. The top one on the list is the 1989 shellacking that I picked as my lopsided in the last installment. The 1990 Fall "Classic" also did well. The 1932 Series dropped to 27th after finishing in the bottom three in Unearned Runs Average. The Yankees had 7 unearned runs that year to the Cubs' 2, even though they were closer in errors (Yankees 8, Cubs 6).

The most lopsided seven-game series was the 1996 NLCS. It went seven games even though the Braves outscored the Cards 3.71 runs per game (6.29 to 2.57). The Braves won two games by football scores (14-0 and 15-0, the seventh game) though the rest was relatively close (one 5-run win, the rest within 2 runs).

The most lopsided seven-game World Series was the 2001 D-Back-Yankee affair coming at 47th.

On the flip side of the coin, the least dominating playoff series victors were:

The 1973 Series is an appropriate choice for the top spot. The series started with a one-run (2-1) win by the A's, a game won in the 12th by the Mets (10-7), and a game won in the 11th by the A's (3-2). The A's had a 2-1 edge but the series was extremely close to that point. Next, the Mets won big 6-1 to even the series and 2-0 on a combined three-hitter from Jerry Koosman and Tug McGraw, to take a 3-2 lead. The A's won the last two 3-1 and 5-2.

There are a number of series that could have gone either way to fill out the list.

The least dominating sweep—and I take pride in this—was the 1976 NLCS, in which the Big Red Machine razed my Phils (the 91st least dominating with scores of 6-3, 6-2, and 7-6). The least dominating World Series sweep was the NY Giants over the Cleveland Indians, winners of 111 during the regular season, in 1954 (106th least dominating, about middle of the pack—5-2, 3-1, 6-2, and 7-4), followed by 1907 (Cubs-Tigers) and 1950 (Yanks-Phils—again!).

If the well isn't dry yet, I might take a stab at finding the closest series of all-time by looking at the absolute values of the differences. I know America is holding its collective breath.