I was a 10 year old Mets fan in NJ, but the Tigers were my #2 team in '87. I even had a Tigers hat. Sheridan's home run is one of my happiest memories of post-season baseball, of all time. The '80s were the best.

That was a great moment, and at the time I was hoping it signaled a turning point in this series. Still can’t believe Minnesota won this Series

Oh god no, I hated those Twins uniforms. Replacing the iconic TC with that stupid M was awful. :P

Wish I did! Game 4 is the only game of the entire '87 postseason I don't have, unfortunately :(

According to the late George Kell, the Twins were the better team. I'm still trying to figure that out; they really only had two starters.

@@generalbullmoose In a seven game series in those days teams went to three man rotations and as a result the Twins top two starters were going to make five of the seven starts(if it went that long) But the Tigers starting pitching wasn't very good in this series and the Twins took advantage of that.

I did. Look again, at the full speed of when it happened, and look at the front leg.

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what you do in the regular season...the postseason, imo, is a different animal. I saw what the tigers did in regular season against the twins and in interleague with the cardinals...pretty good. But again postseason is a different story.

In his autobiography, the late George Kell maintained the Twins were the better team in '87. I know the Tigers were mentally drained after the division race that year.

generalbullmoose the thing with the Twins that year was that they were less mediocre than they were Jekyll and Hyde. In one way most people know about and another most people don't think of. Most people think of the home/road disparity. They were 56-25 at home, 29-52 on the road. (And actually a lot of that road record came from the second half. First half they weren't an absolute disaster on the road--20-27, but on the road in the second half they were 9-25.) Now, by today's rules the team with the better record gets home-field advantage, not an alternating year scheme like they had with the two division setup. So that could have made a difference although they did win 2 of 3 on the road in this series as well. But the other Jekyll and Hyde aspect definitely made them a much better team in a short series than their record would indicate, and that's the fact that when either Viola or Blyleven started, they were 45-28, and only 40-49 when anyone but those two started. But in a best of 7 series, those two would start 5 of the 7, so that has to be taken into account as well with the relative strength of these teams for a short series. And yes, the pennant races were a factor as well. They both won by 2 games, but yes, the Tigers didn't clinch until the last day of the season, while the Twins clinched with a week to go and it only got back to 2 games because they lost their last 5 games after clinching when they were resting a lot of their starters for the playoffs.

@@ADEAL918 This is the best summary of the 87 Twins. As a A's fan it blew me away a 85-77 team won it all. It was a trip they had 91 wins in 1988 but were 13 games back.

AVC IV ha, well as an A's fan you gotta remember too that '73 A's team that ALMOST lost to an even worse team than the '87 Twins--that Mets team was the worst record to ever make it to a World Series at 82-79, and they took a 3 games to 2 lead before the A's took Games 6 and 7 at home to pull it out. I remember as a Twins fan in '06, I was rooting very hard for that Cardinal team because I wanted them to take that dubious record off the Twins' hands!

?

?

BrooklynMark Are you blind or do you not know what center field is?