But while the Yankees had the best winning percentage for the 2000s as a whole -- .597, with a 965-651 record -- we have chosen the Red Sox as the team of the decade.Price does point out that the Yankees averaged 4.5 more wins per season than the Sox, won two more pennants, and took six more division titles, but still the Red Sox get the nod. Why? I'm not quite sure, maybe it's the trendy thing to do, but apparently it has something to do with Boston becoming "accustomed to the same expectations heaped upon Yankees" or something like that.
Boston earns the nod not just based on its success but also for the way the franchise turned itself around and became a standard-bearer in ways for the industry.
It's almost hard to believe now, with the Sox as annual contenders, but the decade began with the Curse of the Bambino in full swing. Boston had not won a World Series since 1918 and was firmly in the shadow of its hated rival to the south.
But in 2004 the curse was ended as the Red Sox became the first team to overcome a 3-0 deficit in a playoff series, knocking off the Yankees in the ALCS, and then swept the Cardinals in the World Series.
That October was the defining time of the decade. It saddled the Yankees' with a vulnerability that lasted five years, it dialed up the Yankees-Red Sox rivalry and it turned New England fans' expectations from inevitable doom to annual contention.
Three years later, Boston won again, sweeping Colorado. And now the Red Sox have had to become accustomed to the same expectations heaped upon Yankees, where anything less than a title is a disappointment.
Whether it's that, or trendy, or these guys just hate the Yankees, they're wrong. The Yankees were clearly the team of the decade.
