PDA

View Full Version : Which 0-3 team should be most concerned?



Machinehead
04-09-2012, 12:12 PM
Which 0-3 team should be most concerned?

CHRISDODGERS
04-09-2012, 12:15 PM
none of them. /thread

VRP723
04-09-2012, 12:23 PM
Red Sox or Braves. After the way last season ended for those guys, starting on a good foot would have been ideal for their psyche I'd think. Not that it means much for anyone, but it means a little more for them than for the Yankees or Giants.

bosox3431
04-09-2012, 12:26 PM
None. They're all good teams and should rebound. Its still way early for anyone to panic. I'm sure there's some sox fans already jumping ship.

KNICKS R BACK
04-09-2012, 12:26 PM
braves

The_Jamal
04-09-2012, 12:30 PM
Giants will be fine. There's no chance in hell Timmy, Cain and Bum all give up 5+ runs in a series like they did in this one.

OneTuzSea
04-09-2012, 12:30 PM
None and if you think any of them should be worried you're ********.

VRP723
04-09-2012, 12:31 PM
None and if you think any of them should be worried you're ********.

:cry:

OneTuzSea
04-09-2012, 12:32 PM
:cry:

Shutup ******.

VRP723
04-09-2012, 12:35 PM
But really, I disagree. You obviously have to laugh at the people who act like the sky is falling after 3 games, but there's no reason you can't be a little concerned after the way they finished last season.

OneTuzSea
04-09-2012, 12:39 PM
But really, I disagree. You obviously have to laugh at the people who act like the sky is falling after 3 games, but there's no reason you can't be a little concerned after the way they finished last season.

They could go win five games in a row and it would be erased. Come back to this thread in a month and see if you still think they should've panicked.

If they're actually panicking then there's a reason to panic because there really isn't a reason... that made sense in my head.

Yankee Clipper
04-09-2012, 12:40 PM
None. It's three games into the season.

Ladies Man
04-09-2012, 12:42 PM
Too early to tell

VRP723
04-09-2012, 12:45 PM
They could go win five games in a row and it would be erased. Come back to this thread in a month and see if you still think they should've panicked.

If they're actually panicking then there's a reason to panic because there really isn't a reason... that made sense in my head.

Again, there's a difference between concern and "panic". I never said the word panic, I said the opposite, I said that the people acting like the sky is falling are foolish. But you can be concerned, that's all I said.

Public Enemy #1
04-09-2012, 12:49 PM
None of these teams have to worry... :laugh:

LeFtY182
04-09-2012, 12:49 PM
none..there is 159 games left

utl768
04-09-2012, 12:50 PM
braves

that offense is pathetic and the pitching doesnt look right

mark1125
04-09-2012, 12:53 PM
None of them should be worried. The Yanks and Sox lost to playoff calibur teams and it is only 3 games.

With that said, Bostons pitching staff would have me somewhat concerned. Baileys loss is huge. I think Bard belongs in the pen. I would pop Cook into the rotation and let Bard close. Lester looked very sharp and I wouldn't worry about Beckett/Buchholz.

But to be overly concerned or panicked after 3 games is silly.

OneTuzSea
04-09-2012, 12:55 PM
Again, there's a difference between concern and "panic". I never said the word panic, I said the opposite, I said that the people acting like the sky is falling are foolish. But you can be concerned, that's all I said.

Ah, ok. I still wouldn't really be concerned either, though. I guess it's fine if fans want to be concerned with it, but if it's already in the teams mind that they should be worried; that would be a problem.

the_jon
04-09-2012, 01:03 PM
Think the Red Sox should be concerned but not because they are 0-3

dannyh1469
04-09-2012, 01:04 PM
Red sox and it isn't because of the bad start but because of bailey's injury and it just looks like they have no respect for bobby valentine

MotownWebGuy
04-09-2012, 01:06 PM
None and if you think any of them should be worried you're ********.

Only a ****** would believe Boston doesn't have deep bullpen issues.

I might be able to say the same thing about their rotation after their next series.

benzni
04-09-2012, 01:08 PM
3 games in

none of them

scottythegreat1
04-09-2012, 01:14 PM
Atlanta......

BUT like many people have already said, Its still too early. There is plenty of Baseball left this season. I picked Atlanta just because of who they were playing...The team I projected to lose over 100 games (NY Mets), and I wanted to pick a team.

The Red Sox and Yankees usually start off slow, plus they were playing teams that Ive projected to be in the playoffs (Detroit and Tampa), so its not like they were playing bad teams.

This poll would be better used at about 20 games into the season, not 3. I suggest re-posting this poll near the end of April (maybe itll be the same teams, maybe it wont).

teddygreen17
04-09-2012, 01:15 PM
While it is too early to tell with any teams, personally I feel that the Red Sox might implode this year. I don't trust Salty, Beckett is not stable, their bullpen is in shambles and the Yankees and Rays might simply be better teams.

Jeffy25
04-09-2012, 01:15 PM
None, it's meaningless.

Last year the Rays and Red Sox started off with what kind of record?

While having a hot April is important, it isn't vital.

YankeesR#2
04-09-2012, 01:22 PM
The thing about the yankees is that a large number of their key players are on the wrong side of 30 (wrong for a baseball player that is).

This isn't real scientific, I just took the members of their active roster from ESPN and checked the salaries by age

___________Over 30___________Over 35
yankees__ $158,855,104_____ $71,769,390
Red Sox___ $53,391,500_____ $15,085,000
Braves____ $21,296,942______ $1,250,000
Giants_____ $42,725,000________ $925,000

The yankees are an old team and the drugs aren't what they used to be.

The yankees are paying $150 million+ to players on their roster over 30 and $70 million+ over 35. I think one day it's going to catch up with them and this is starting to look like the day.

long ball
04-09-2012, 01:34 PM
They should all be concerned with where they will be drafting because they were all eliminated from playoff contention this weekend.

1903
04-09-2012, 01:40 PM
All of them have been eliminated from the Opening Week playoffs.

Pinstripe pride
04-09-2012, 01:44 PM
none.

S.P.
04-09-2012, 03:06 PM
The Twins should be concerned that they were left out of this poll.

Jeffy25
04-09-2012, 03:13 PM
The thing about the yankees is that a large number of their key players are on the wrong side of 30 (wrong for a baseball player that is).

This isn't real scientific, I just took the members of their active roster from ESPN and checked the salaries by age

___________Over 30___________Over 35
yankees__ $158,855,104_____ $71,769,390
Red Sox___ $53,391,500_____ $15,085,000
Braves____ $21,296,942______ $1,250,000
Giants_____ $42,725,000________ $925,000

The yankees are an old team and the drugs aren't what they used to be.

The yankees are paying $150 million+ to players on their roster over 30 and $70 million+ over 35. I think one day it's going to catch up with them and this is starting to look like the day.

The Yankees issue is that they met up with possibly the best team in baseball, and that team had a great series.

But yes, they are getting very old very fast.

SportsAndrew25
04-09-2012, 03:14 PM
As history shows us, starting 0-3 means nothing. The Yankees started 0-3 in 1998 and went on to win the World Series in a four game sweep. However, on this poll, I am really concerned about the Braves. I think they need that offense to do something or they are in deep **** this season.

lol, please
04-09-2012, 03:26 PM
braves

that offense is pathetic and the pitching doesnt look right

:laugh2:

es0terik
04-09-2012, 03:31 PM
The Yankees issue is that they met up with possibly the best team in baseball, and that team had a great series.

But yes, they are getting very old very fast.

I pointed out in the Jays IGT that though it is a small sample size, the Yankees actually have the highest walk rate in the majors right now with the third lowest strikeout rate. They are the only team that is walking more than they are striking out, and plate discipline is exactly the thing (for me, it's the only thing) that you want to see from your hitters this early in the season. Everybody at this point has a tendency to overcompensate and swing at everything because they want to start the season off on a strong note, and that is one reason why pitching seems so dominant early on. The Yankees already showing an incredibly patient approach as a team can only mean really good things for them right now. We have yet to see if they will continue to play this way but if I had to bank on a specific team's offense this early, I like what the Yankees have done so far.

Jeffy25
04-09-2012, 03:34 PM
I pointed out in the Jays IGT that though it is a small sample size, the Yankees actually have the highest walk rate in the majors right now with the third lowest strikeout rate.

I noticed that too. The Rays walked like 14% but the Yankees were even ahead of that. The Yankees just couldn't get any extra base hits.

That and they kept hitting into Maddon's shifts which were deployed perfectly.

The Yankees will be fine, 90 wins no problem. But this Rays team could even be a 100 win team. They are really that good.

Nymfan87
04-09-2012, 03:35 PM
If I had to pick one, I'd say the Braves. They need Heyward and Prado to bounce back, and Hanson/JJ/Hudson to all avoid the injury bug and play well. And they need to hope they haven't burned out the bullpen arms yet.

FachoinaNYY
04-09-2012, 03:45 PM
This seems to happen every year now. Do people not understand baseball? There are 162 games, this is not a 0-3 in the NFL (even in the NFL 0-3 is not a death sentence) or even the NBA.

If I had to answer I would say Braves, from what I have seen they look terrible. But it is still too early for any of this.

"Ace"ves
04-09-2012, 03:51 PM
Yankees

Rivera blew a save = he is not capable anymore
Kuroda pitched poorly = he is a bad acquisition
Ibanez played the ball in yesterday's game poorly = Ibanez can't play the field (well... okay this one is true).

But seriously, give these guys some time. The Yanks, Red Sox, Braves, and Giants will all be in it at the end barring serious injuries

Iodine
04-09-2012, 03:55 PM
Every team should be concerned. It's not like anyone has a chance against the O's

FachoinaNYY
04-09-2012, 04:06 PM
I noticed that too. The Rays walked like 14% but the Yankees were even ahead of that. The Yankees just couldn't get any extra base hits.

That and they kept hitting into Maddon's shifts which were deployed perfectly.

The Yankees will be fine, 90 wins no problem. But this Rays team could even be a 100 win team. They are really that good.

I think the Rays look much better than they will ultimately be. Pena cannot continue this and without his current production that lineup is pretty bad. Longoria is the only big bad and he will get pitched around a ton.

tp13baby
04-09-2012, 04:21 PM
None of these teams should be. The least concerned should be the Giants, damn putting up some runs.:p

bomber0104
04-09-2012, 04:30 PM
Red Sox for me.. How can you not be concerned about that staff and pen..

After Lester, they got no one they can count on. I mean Beckett was great last year but he got lucky. He has historically struggled against all AL East teams.

The pen is just God awful.

oak2455
04-09-2012, 04:30 PM
The thing about the yankees is that a large number of their key players are on the wrong side of 30 (wrong for a baseball player that is).

This isn't real scientific, I just took the members of their active roster from ESPN and checked the salaries by age

___________Over 30___________Over 35
yankees__ $158,855,104_____ $71,769,390
Red Sox___ $53,391,500_____ $15,085,000
Braves____ $21,296,942______ $1,250,000
Giants_____ $42,725,000________ $925,000

The yankees are an old team and the drugs aren't what they used to be.

The yankees are paying $150 million+ to players on their roster over 30 and $70 million+ over 35. I think one day it's going to catch up with them and this is starting to look like the day.

Wow great post now go watch game 4 of 162 :facepalm:

es0terik
04-09-2012, 04:31 PM
I noticed that too. The Rays walked like 14% but the Yankees were even ahead of that. The Yankees just couldn't get any extra base hits.

That and they kept hitting into Maddon's shifts which were deployed perfectly.

The Yankees will be fine, 90 wins no problem. But this Rays team could even be a 100 win team. They are really that good.

I've got Moore, Shields, Upton, Zobrist and Jennings all on one fantasy team lol.

Yankee Clipper
04-09-2012, 04:33 PM
I've got Moore, Shields, Upton, Zobrist and Jennings all on one fantasy team lol.

I like your chances already :laugh2:

Havok24
04-09-2012, 04:35 PM
Red Sox for me.. How can you not be concerned about that staff and pen..

After Lester, they got no one they can count on. I mean Beckett was great last year but he got lucky. He has historically struggled against all AL East teams.

The pen is just God awful.

Yup.

TrueYankee
04-09-2012, 04:41 PM
Red Sox for me.. How can you not be concerned about that staff and pen..

After Lester, they got no one they can count on. I mean Beckett was great last year but he got lucky. He has historically struggled against all AL East teams.

The pen is just God awful.

Well I wouldn't discount Bucholz cause he has the ability to be good when he wants to. Other than that, I mainly agree. That bullpen is puke.


I've got Moore, Shields, Upton, Zobrist and Jennings all on one fantasy team lol.

I only have Moore. Hopefully there is no innings limit with him

es0terik
04-09-2012, 04:42 PM
I only have Moore. Hopefully there is no innings limit with him

There isn't. They've already said that they're gonna unchain Moore and let the beast loose.

Besides, I doubt they're paying him millions of dollars to sit on the bench at the end of the season when they most need him.

Yankee Clipper
04-09-2012, 04:47 PM
I only have Moore. Hopefully there is no innings limit with him

Nope, they're going to likely turn him loose.

papipapsmanny
04-09-2012, 04:55 PM
don't see how you can say you are concerned with anyone's rotation when they haven't even all pitched yet

im not worried about the sox bullpen, mostly just the closer. Bard of Alex Wilson will be closing in the near future imo

MCSJR2
04-09-2012, 05:04 PM
I say the Braves.....they can't manufacture runs, the batters aren't disciplined, poor base running...poor management, the list goes on and on...

goldenstater
04-09-2012, 06:09 PM
none of them. /thread

this.

VRP723
04-09-2012, 06:12 PM
I noticed that too. The Rays walked like 14% but the Yankees were even ahead of that. The Yankees just couldn't get any extra base hits.

That and they kept hitting into Maddon's shifts which were deployed perfectly.

The Yankees will be fine, 90 wins no problem. But this Rays team could even be a 100 win team. They are really that good.

Literally laughed out loud when I saw this. Jeffy we get it you like the Rays, but I'll quit this site and never post again if they win 100 games.

mtf
04-09-2012, 06:15 PM
The only team on this list that I'd be concerned about (if I was a fan of it in the first place) would be the Boston Red Sox. That isn't merely because they got swept, but I'd already be concerned about that team before the season began. The sweep would just further exacerbate that concern. Lester, and the top 3 in the line-up are good, but other than that I don't like their team. Wouldn't be shocked to see them finish 4th in the division.

Jeffy25
04-09-2012, 06:49 PM
I think the Rays look much better than they will ultimately be. Pena cannot continue this and without his current production that lineup is pretty bad. Longoria is the only big bad and he will get pitched around a ton.

I doubt he gets pitched around anymore than in any other years.

They are around 10th-12th best team offensively, and possibly the best team top to bottom pitching wise.

They won 91 games last year with their two best players having career worst seasons which won't be repeated (Longo and Price), all of their young players are a year older, they are a top three team defensively in baseball, and they do everything as a full team.

And they started off last year 0-6, they were 91-65 the rest of the season, that's .583.

They have the entire team back, with improved players (Scott, Pena, etc) are better than (Damon and Kotchman).

I think they very easily should post over 95 wins, and could very well be a 100 win team.

Jeffy25
04-09-2012, 06:51 PM
Literally laughed out loud when I saw this. Jeffy we get it you like the Rays, but I'll quit this site and never post again if they win 100 games.

There is no reason to think 100 wins is out of reach for them.

Deemerc
04-09-2012, 07:13 PM
The Yankees. Soon they are gonna have to push half the team around the bases in wheelchairs

papipapsmanny
04-09-2012, 08:21 PM
There is no reason to think 100 wins is out of reach for them.

woo buddy slow down there

giants73756
04-09-2012, 08:39 PM
None of these teams should have to worry much, but the questions is who should worry the most. I say the Braves. The Yanks, Sox, and Giants all faced tough foes on the road (Rays, Tigers, DBacks). Braves lost 3 to the Mets. But it's only 3 games out of 162.

Also like others have said, those collapses last year has the Sox and Braves fans worrying.

I'm actually a little happy with this 1-3 start by the Giants. This game by Zito makes me think maybe he has something left in the tank, and our offense has been producing. We know Timmy, Cain, and MadBum will get back to being dominant.

VRP723
04-09-2012, 09:05 PM
There is no reason to think 100 wins is out of reach for them.

Yes, there absolutely is. It's more likely they finish 3rd than 1st, let alone win 100 games.

7chuck7
04-09-2012, 09:23 PM
Which 0-3 team should be most concerned?

I honestly thought the red sox would stink even before the season started. Their pitching is a joke. Sox fans acting as they normally do planned on ultimate scenarios for the pitching staff. Lester is good. Bard is a good reliever and the rest of them blow. Beckett is washed up. It's over Josh....good riddance!

Jeffy25
04-09-2012, 10:48 PM
Yes, there absolutely is. It's more likely they finish 3rd than 1st, let alone win 100 games.

What makes you say they can't win 100 games?

They won 91 games last year and are absolutely better this year than they were last year.

VRP723
04-09-2012, 10:52 PM
Because they don't have 100 win talent. I'll say they win around 91 again, they can probably get up to around 95. They will not win 100 games. I'd bet a lot of money on that.

The X
04-09-2012, 10:53 PM
98 yankees started 0-3 and look what happened with their regular season.

Same thing as losing 3 games in a row in the middle of the season. Will someone please close this thread.

papipapsmanny
04-09-2012, 11:00 PM
What makes you say they can't win 100 games?

They won 91 games last year and are absolutely better this year than they were last year.

because there offense is still shotty and their rotation, while full of talent, will have growing pains

and their bullpen is meh

they have questions just like everyone else, no way they get to 100 wins

lol, please
04-09-2012, 11:27 PM
Literally laughed out loud when I saw this. Jeffy we get it you like the Rays, but I'll quit this site and never post again if they win 100 games.

There is no reason to think 100 wins is out of reach for them.Sarcasm?

Jeffy25
04-09-2012, 11:28 PM
because there offense is still shotty and their rotation, while full of talent, will have growing pains

and their bullpen is meh

they have questions just like everyone else, no way they get to 100 wins

I am not saying they will for sure, I'm saying they are fully capable of it.

Which is all I have said.

Their bullpen should be quite solid to good/okay. They are better than last year's pen and that pen had a 3.73 ERA in almost 400 innings, which was 15th in baseball.

What in their rotation should having growing pains? Matt Moore is the only new pitcher and he is...well one of the best pitching prospects we have seen in awhile.

Hellickson should easily be better, and Shields and Price are one of the better 1,2's in baseball. I would bet their rotation is better this year than they were last year, which was 9th best in fWAR, with the 4th best ERA and the best ERA in the AL last year. I don't see how that rotation, the best in the AL, should regress at all.

And their lineup is actually very good. They were the 8th best hitting team in baseball last year, and I would say their lineup is improved.

And their defense should be top 3 again, last year they were arguably the best with the D'Backs.

I feel confident in saying they will win 90, and I think 100 is within their reach. The only people that don't agree with that assessment are the same people that continue to under-rate them, even after 4 years of consistently doing so. This is a great team, a team that won 91 games, continued to defy the odds, and have once again, improved without spending any money.

At some point, people will begin to notice how good this team actually is, and that their success is actually sustainable. 100 wins isn't probable, but it's more than possible. They are quite possibly the best team in baseball this year.

iliketurtles24
04-09-2012, 11:44 PM
twins

VRP723
04-09-2012, 11:50 PM
Jeffy saying a team isn't 100 wins good isn't saying they're not good. Predicting a team to win 90+, like I did, is saying they're going to be good. But they will not win 100 games, and they most likely will not finish ahead of the Yankees, who are better than they are.

And to a few of your points, Shields is a very likely candidate to regress. Hellickson, despite having bad peripherals, put up an ERA in the high 2's. He'll probably improve his FIP, sure, but his ERA is most definitely going to go up, which will cost them games.

AIsixersFK
04-09-2012, 11:55 PM
Hahahaha its been three games. Come talk to me in July. Remember two years ago when the Indians were the best team in the league and failed to make the post season?

kyubi256
04-10-2012, 12:12 AM
Braves. They just looked awful and you have to worry about their hitting.

Although Red Sox, have to worry about the pitching

Vikingfan84
04-10-2012, 12:16 AM
You do realize there's 159 more games right? This is not the NFL.

otatop
04-10-2012, 12:18 AM
Every team should be concerned. It's not like anyone has a chance against the O's

3-4 years ago, people would have joked about the Diamondbacks this way. Teams can sneak up on you, not that the Orioles necessarily (or likely) will.

FortDetroit
04-10-2012, 12:27 AM
100 wins for the Rays :speechless::laugh:

Sure it's "only 9 more wins than last year" but once you get up to the 90+ win range it's much more difficult to increase your win total to 100 than the raw number (9 in this case) would suggest.

Hell, it took a miracle for the Rays to even make the playoffs last year and now they have a good chance to win 100. :laugh:

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 02:21 AM
100 wins for the Rays :speechless::laugh:

Sure it's "only 9 more wins than last year" but once you get up to the 90+ win range it's much more difficult to increase your win total to 100 than the raw number (9 in this case) would suggest.

Hell, it took a miracle for the Rays to even make the playoffs last year and now they have a good chance to win 100. :laugh:

How did it take a miracle for the Rays to win 91 games last year?

It is exactly what their pythageroan record was, and, as said above, they are arguably a better team this year.



Jeffy saying a team isn't 100 wins good isn't saying they're not good. Predicting a team to win 90+, like I did, is saying they're going to be good. But they will not win 100 games, and they most likely will not finish ahead of the Yankees, who are better than they are.


You can't say they won't when they certainly can. The Yankees are probably the better team, not disputing that, I had the Yankees as the best team in baseball on my ranking. But the Rays are fully capable of winning 100 games this year.





And to a few of your points, Shields is a very likely candidate to regress. Hellickson, despite having bad peripherals, put up an ERA in the high 2's. He'll probably improve his FIP, sure, but his ERA is most definitely going to go up, which will cost them games.

Hellickson as a pitcher will improve, and his regression in ERA will still be replaced by the very likely ERA improvement out of Price and by giving some of Neimann/Davis starts to Moore.

I am not, and have not said they will win 100 games this year, but they are absolutely capable of it. You can't say they won't, because they absolutely can.

shizzle09
04-10-2012, 02:37 AM
we have Zito so no need to be worried! lol

2-0-Niner
04-10-2012, 02:40 AM
Braves cause of Hitting, Red Sox cause their pitchers are fat.....

Boozerguy47
04-10-2012, 03:21 AM
Yankees because they are fossils.

Honestly though, I'd say the Red Sox or Yankees... The Sox pitching isn't looking too stellar.

LASportsFan1996
04-10-2012, 04:24 AM
Braves

Eagles710
04-10-2012, 04:44 AM
All of the above, if you think any team in baseball can come back after a HORRIBLE 0-3 Start you are crazy.... There is only 159! GAMES TO GO!!!!!!!!

I guess the Mets Locked up The WS

YankeesR#2
04-10-2012, 07:22 AM
I saw this poll on ESPN and the world agrees with me.

#1?

Yankees 34%.

Iodine
04-10-2012, 07:27 AM
3-4 years ago, people would have joked about the Diamondbacks this way. Teams can sneak up on you, not that the Orioles necessarily (or likely) will.

The O's are the AL team I like the most lol, but their farm system outside of Machado and Bundy makes me cry so damn much

papipapsmanny
04-10-2012, 11:57 AM
and no jeffry i don't respect the rays all that much yet, they were handed the playoffs on a silver platter along with 10 grand in it last year

I love Joe Maddon, but the rays really do need to get a new stadium to have a better financial standing

The rays are going to keep getting lucky in the draft, and yes it is a lot of luck

I thought the suck were unstoppable with prospects as they popped out ellsbury, pedroia, bard, buchholz, masterson, lester, papelbon is a very short amount of time

and since bard things really slowed down a lot, that may be changing

but even the best drafters get lucky, and have slumps

benzni
04-10-2012, 12:06 PM
so i guess they will miss the playoffs then. Well, cya next season everybody

oak2455
04-10-2012, 12:14 PM
I saw this poll on ESPN and the world agrees with me.

#1?

Yankees 34%.

so there is 34% who dislikes the Yanks wow thought it was higher:clap::clap: also you think the world votes on this......now I've read it all!!! comedy!!!

VRP723
04-10-2012, 01:16 PM
How did it take a miracle for the Rays to win 91 games last year?

It is exactly what their pythageroan record was, and, as said above, they are arguably a better team this year.




You can't say they won't when they certainly can. The Yankees are probably the better team, not disputing that, I had the Yankees as the best team in baseball on my ranking. But the Rays are fully capable of winning 100 games this year.


Hellickson as a pitcher will improve, and his regression in ERA will still be replaced by the very likely ERA improvement out of Price and by giving some of Neimann/Davis starts to Moore.

I am not, and have not said they will win 100 games this year, but they are absolutely capable of it. You can't say they won't, because they absolutely can.

I can say they won't, because they absolutely can't. Just to make sure I wasn't the crazy one I asked a few knowledgeable guys on AIM (Twitchy and JD) and they both literally laughed at the concept. Make a poll if you'd like, no one other than you thinks this is a team capable of winning 100 games.

Bo Sox Fan
04-10-2012, 01:56 PM
When is the last time both the Yankees and Red Sox missed the playoffs in the same year?

2-0-Niner
04-10-2012, 01:58 PM
The AL east is almost a Lock for the Wild Card Every Year. The Yanks, Ray and Sox all have 90+ win potential each year

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 02:18 PM
and no jeffry i don't respect the rays all that much yet, they were handed the playoffs on a silver platter along with 10 grand in it last year



Handed the playoffs on a silver platter?

Did they not beat the Red Sox 6 out of 7 times in Sept and overall go 35-20 in Aug and Sept?

Did they not win 91 games? Something that almost always guarantees you a playoff spot

This isn't the 06 Cardinals that won 83 games that only made the playoffs because of the division they are in, they earned their playoff appearance last year. It pisses me off that nobody gives the Rays any credit for making the playoffs, all they do is talk about how the Red Sox collapsed. As though the Rays didn't earn it. They absolutely ****ing did earn it, they played awesome the last two months of the season and won the games they had to win. You don't win 91 games and be lucky. I realize the Red Sox had all the hype and were supposed to be this amazing team, but the Rays were better, people shouldn't take that away from them. They were the better team, and they beat them head-to-head.



I love Joe Maddon, but the rays really do need to get a new stadium to have a better financial standing
Financials have nothing to do with their ability to win 100 games in 2012, or why they have been arguably the best team in the AL East for the last four years.


The rays are going to keep getting lucky in the draft, and yes it is a lot of luck
How?

How on earth is it luck? They literally have a book out about their strategies that are not luck based. The only thing lucky is if the guy gets hurt or not, and when you are drafting 50 guys every year, it isn't luck. This team repeatedly has top prospects ready to replace their stars as their stars reach their 6 years of team control. I LOVED when Carl Crawford got his huge deal and signed with the Red Sox, and the Rays not only got the Red Sox top draft pick and a supplemental pick, but also have a better player in Desmond Jennings ready to take over. And it wasn't luck that they drafted Jennings, they developed him and took a high priced risk to sign him. Same with Moore, same with all of their picks. They got Price and Longo early in the draft, and that's it of their core. Arguably their best player Ben Zobrist was just sitting out there like Jose Bautista used to be when they grabbed him.

There is nothing lucky about their continued successful strategy since they have put a new front office and ownership into place.


I thought the suck were unstoppable with prospects as they popped out ellsbury, pedroia, bard, buchholz, masterson, lester, papelbon is a very short amount of time

and since bard things really slowed down a lot, that may be changing
You have to develop, it's more important than drafting, developing the prospects, not just drafting guys with upside.


but even the best drafters get lucky, and have slumps

They will have their busts, like Dewon Brazelton and Delmon Young. But since they have gotten new ownership in place, the team has had great drafts, and this past draft is no different.

But what does any of this have to do with the Rays being capable of winning 100 games this year?

Pinstripe pride
04-10-2012, 02:24 PM
when is the last time both the yankees and red sox missed the playoffs in the same year?

1993. almost 20 years

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 02:27 PM
I can say they won't, because they absolutely can't. Just to make sure I wasn't the crazy one I asked a few knowledgeable guys on AIM (Twitchy and JD) and they both literally laughed at the concept. Make a poll if you'd like, no one other than you thinks this is a team capable of winning 100 games.

You literally can not say never in baseball. You would have laughed out loud at me if I said in August that the Cardinals were going to win the World Series.

You literally can never say a team can't. And it's woefully ignorant to say a team that won 91 games last year, that is improved this year isn't capable of winning 100 games when in fact, they absolutely are.

And who cares what other people think? Do I care if you ask other people and they happen to agree with you? This Rays organization consistently gets under-valued. How many more times will they need to prove everybody wrong? If you think they are a 90 win team, that means they are fully capable of winning 100 games. That's no different than you saying the Dodgers are a 75 win team, capable of winning 85 games.

I'm really surprised guys that talk so much about baseball would risk being so wrong on something so easy to recognize.

And for what it's worth, I was alone last April when I talked about how the Rays were fully capable of making the playoffs in 2011 after their 0-6 start. I was the only one talking about them in a thread saying they were a playoff caliber team. I don't care if I'm the only one preaching how good they are, I was right last year and I was the only one, why would this year be any different?

A team wins 96 games, then 91 games, and is arguably improved. I say they are capable of winning 100 games the following year, and I'm laughed at? lol, I'll take it.

Iodine
04-10-2012, 02:30 PM
I am saying the O's win 150 games guys, thats all.

VRP723
04-10-2012, 02:33 PM
I was the only one talking about them in a thread saying they were a playoff caliber team. I don't care if I'm the only one preaching how good they are, I was right last year and I was the only one, why would this year be any different?

I can't wait until the world catches up with you Jeffy and acknowledges how good the Rays are. Really though, get over yourself. We get it you know how to read articles on Fangraphs, that doesn't make you Theo Epstein. That holier-than-thou attitude that you and a few others around here have is getting unbearable, and is a main reason a lot of good posters stopped coming around. Just stop.

Boston-Born
04-10-2012, 02:36 PM
I can't wait until the world catches up with you Jeffy and acknowledges how good the Rays are. Really though, get over yourself. We get it you know how to read articles on Fangraphs, that doesn't make you Theo Epstein. That holier-than-thou attitude that you and a few others around here have is getting unbearable, and is a main reason a lot of good posters stopped coming around. Just stop.

Can I get an amen?

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 02:38 PM
I can't wait until the world catches up with you Jeffy and acknowledges how good the Rays are. Really though, get over yourself. We get it you know how to read articles on Fangraphs, that doesn't make you Theo Epstein. That holier-than-thou attitude that you and a few others around here have is getting unbearable, and is a main reason a lot of good posters stopped coming around. Just stop.

Get over myself?

Did you not just say this incredibly petty, juvenile comment?


I can say they won't, because they absolutely can't. Just to make sure I wasn't the crazy one I asked a few knowledgeable guys on AIM (Twitchy and JD) and they both literally laughed at the concept. Make a poll if you'd like, no one other than you thinks this is a team capable of winning 100 games.


You come after my comments, make a post like that and then try to chop out my knees for saying a team is capable of winning 100 games?

I don't think I'm the one that needs to get over myself.

VRP723
04-10-2012, 02:41 PM
I claimed a team couldn't win 100 games after I asked two of the smarter guys on this site and they agreed.

You wrote an essay about how you alone recognized the Rays greatness and are standing at the forefront of PSD forum knowledge.

Seriously you're going to compare those two?

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 02:43 PM
I claimed a team couldn't win 100 games after I asked two of the smarter guys on this site and they agreed.

You wrote an essay about how you alone recognized the Rays greatness and are standing at the forefront of PSD forum knowledge.

Seriously you're going to compare those two?

You support that you are right because you asked two other people of similar baseball knowledge as each of us, and since they agreed with you, that makes you right?

That was petty saying they 'literally laughed' at the idea, how else am I supposed to respond?

I state an opinion, and your response is to go find two people that agree with you, and tell me that my opinion is wrong because you guys disagree with me? But I need to get over myself because I explain why the team is better than people assume?

RTL
04-10-2012, 02:54 PM
And for what it's worth, I was alone last April when I talked about how the Rays were fully capable of making the playoffs in 2011 after their 0-6 start.

No, no you weren't. I was right there with you, bud. :)

VRP723
04-10-2012, 02:57 PM
"Explaining why the team is better than people assume" is different than dedicating a paragraph to telling us how you alone were the only person with the vision to think the Rays could make the playoffs. Do you not see the difference between those two?

One is fine, the other is pretentious.

Donuts365
04-10-2012, 02:59 PM
yankees im a mets fan and if we keep playing like how we playing now we can be the best team in ny plus MLB

KeeptheFaith22
04-10-2012, 03:09 PM
I firmly still see the Red Sox winning the World Series :clap: No issues just get healthy

Bo Sox Fan
04-10-2012, 03:11 PM
Hey Jeffey, did you really see Boston blowing a 9 game playoff lead with only 30 days of baseball left last season?

I highly doubt it, but you probably **** your pants in disbelief when it did. Your dreaming if Tampa gets 95 wins, nevermind 100. LMAO

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 03:13 PM
"Explaining why the team is better than people assume" is different than dedicating a paragraph to telling us how you alone were the only person with the vision to think the Rays could make the playoffs. Do you not see the difference between those two?

One is fine, the other is pretentious.

I didn't dedicate a paragraph, I had three sentences in the middle of a huge post that you completely neglected.

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 03:15 PM
Hey Jeffey, did you really see Boston blowing a 9 game playoff lead with only 30 days of baseball left last season?

I highly doubt it, but you probably **** your pants in disbelief when it did. Your dreaming if Tampa gets 95 wins, nevermind 100. LMAO

No one could have seen that coming, but the Rays did have enough games against the Red Sox and Yankees as of the middle of August that they could mount a comeback. It was talked about, but it was far from likely.

They won 91 games last year, and it's dreaming to think that the same team that is now a year older can come out and win 4 more games?

Pittz
04-10-2012, 03:18 PM
And for what it's worth, I was alone last April when I talked about how the Rays were fully capable of making the playoffs in 2011 after their 0-6 start. I was the only one talking about them in a thread saying they were a playoff caliber team. I don't care if I'm the only one preaching how good they are, I was right last year and I was the only one, why would this year be any different?

So progressive, so hipster. But also not true. TR was the biggest Rays fan on this site, just in a less obsessed way.

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 03:29 PM
I'm sure there were others that were saying the Rays were a playoff caliber team, but it certainly seemed like I was alone in the MLB section last year saying they were a playoff caliber team, like it appears I might be alone in saying they are a 100 win capable team this year.

I was the only person in the MLB section campaigning for them that I can recall, if there were others, then they probably should have spoken up about the Rays at some point.

Everyone was freaking out because they unloaded Garza, Crawford, Pena and didn't replace any of them with any big league players other than Damon/Ramirez and Manny retired within two weeks.

JDIsMyGod23
04-10-2012, 04:11 PM
The irony!

Twitchy
04-10-2012, 04:30 PM
You literally can not say never in baseball. You would have laughed out loud at me if I said in August that the Cardinals were going to win the World Series.

And knowing what we knew at the time, it would have been a crazy, homerish suggestion. There was a chance given the upgrades they'd be better than their record reflects, but picking them over other teams would have been a poor choice regardless. But admittedly they were better than their record reflects, which means a good argument would be that they were a team that had the potential to break out given the changes made.


You literally can never say a team can't. And it's woefully ignorant to say a team that won 91 games last year, that is improved this year isn't capable of winning 100 games when in fact, they absolutely are.


That kind of logic is like saying the KC Royals or Pirates can win 100 games. Anything can happen, you can't say never.

We're dealing with what's realistic. Are they capable? They're a fairly good team. Is it realistic? No. Not with the Yankees being a better team. Not with Toronto being better than last year. Nobody's a 100 win team in that division, and I think the Yanks are the best team in the AL on paper.


And who cares what other people think?

Obviously you do because otherwise this argument would have stopped a long time ago.


Do I care if you ask other people and they happen to agree with you? This Rays organization consistently gets under-valued.

I'd say they get overvalued at times. The bullpen isn't that good. Earlier you said they were middle of the pack - well guess what? They ranked 25/30 in FIP. That's not middle of the pack, that's horrendous. And they've gotten worse, not better.

They do have flaws. They're an above average, but not particularly elite offence. Middle of the pack, maybe slightly above that in the AL. There's a clear separation from NYY/Detroit and someone like the Rays. They have a fantastic starting rotation. A great all around combo. But given that their lineup isn't elite, and their bullpen is below average, they're just not a 100 win team.


How many more times will they need to prove everybody wrong?

When have they proven anybody wrong? They were projected to make the playoffs in 2008. They've won in 3 of the past 4 years. Anybody who thinks this isn't a good team is terrible at evaluating baseball.


If you think they are a 90 win team, that means they are fully capable of winning 100 games.

What? That's not remotely true. If I think they're a 90 win team, it's because I don't think they're a 100 win team. If I thought they were gonna get 100 wins...I'd say so.


That's no different than you saying the Dodgers are a 75 win team, capable of winning 85 games.


I'd say it's fairly different, but then I don't know where these #'s are coming from.


I'm really surprised guys that talk so much about baseball would risk being so wrong on something so easy to recognize.


Pot, meet kettle. The irony is killing me.


And for what it's worth, I was alone last April when I talked about how the Rays were fully capable of making the playoffs in 2011 after their 0-6 start. I was the only one talking about them in a thread saying they were a playoff caliber team. I don't care if I'm the only one preaching how good they are, I was right last year and I was the only one, why would this year be any different?


I didn't post in any thread but in the prediction thread or the preview I said the Rays were a top 8 organization (despite what others said) and that I believed they would go to the playoffs (and be ahead of Boston). So drop the I was alone crap.


A team wins 96 games, then 91 games, and is arguably improved. I say they are capable of winning 100 games the following year, and I'm laughed at? lol, I'll take it.

So they're improved over the 91 win team. Not over the 96 win team. The 96 win team had guys like Carl Crawford posting career years. Good as Jennings is, he's not at that level yet.

They also had an insanely good bullpen, led by Benoit and Soriano among others who had career years. Something their bullpen is currently lacking.

The 2012 team has some very good strengths, but this is a team with just enough flaws that will prevent it from winning 100. Which doesn't mean it's bad. It just means that it's unrealistic to expect them to be capable of 100 wins. Their top 3 guys had 50-60 innings of sub 3 FIP/ERA. Two guys had ERA under 2. They're just not on that level.

It doesn't even matter if they win 100 games. Because in baseball what we should care about is what's realistic, based on what we know at the time, when we project something. And projecting 100 wins, just isn't realistic.

fadedmario
04-10-2012, 04:45 PM
I can't wait until the world catches up with you Jeffy and acknowledges how good the Rays are. Really though, get over yourself. We get it you know how to read articles on Fangraphs, that doesn't make you Theo Epstein. That holier-than-thou attitude that you and a few others around here have is getting unbearable, and is a main reason a lot of good posters stopped coming around. Just stop.

:win:

FortDetroit
04-10-2012, 04:46 PM
How good can the bullpen really be with Fernando Rodney pitching?

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 05:51 PM
And knowing what we knew at the time, it would have been a crazy, homerish suggestion. There was a chance given the upgrades they'd be better than their record reflects, but picking them over other teams would have been a poor choice regardless. But admittedly they were better than their record reflects, which means a good argument would be that they were a team that had the potential to break out given the changes made.

I fully agree, but the Rays might very well be the best in that division, it's possible.



That kind of logic is like saying the KC Royals or Pirates can win 100 games. Anything can happen, you can't say never.
The Rays are clearly a better team than both the Royals and Pirates.


We're dealing with what's realistic. Are they capable? They're a fairly good team. Is it realistic? No. Not with the Yankees being a better team. Not with Toronto being better than last year. Nobody's a 100 win team in that division, and I think the Yanks are the best team in the AL on paper.

As said above, not probable, but possible.


Obviously you do because otherwise this argument would have stopped a long time ago.
No, I don't. I don't like someone trying to bash my opinion because 'two other' people agree with them. That's a really juvenile route to have taken this argument. Especially when I had not brought up anything even close to that. I said they are capable, and his response is, well 'these two guys laughed out loud when I said you think that'. That's petty and childish and does not mean I care what other people think.



I'd say they get overvalued at times. The bullpen isn't that good. Earlier you said they were middle of the pack - well guess what? They ranked 25/30 in FIP. That's not middle of the pack, that's horrendous. And they've gotten worse, not better.
And 15th in ERA. I agree, their periphials were not that great, but they were basically neutral in WPA in 2011. They were close to the middle of the pack.


They do have flaws. They're an above average, but not particularly elite offence. Middle of the pack, maybe slightly above that in the AL. There's a clear separation from NYY/Detroit and someone like the Rays. They have a fantastic starting rotation. A great all around combo. But given that their lineup isn't elite, and their bullpen is below average, they're just not a 100 win team.

I don't necessarily disagree.



When have they proven anybody wrong? They were projected to make the playoffs in 2008. They've won in 3 of the past 4 years. Anybody who thinks this isn't a good team is terrible at evaluating baseball.

Who projected them to make the playoffs in 2008? Were they not the surprise team of the decade that year?

Yeah, by now, everybody should be aware how good this team is.


What? That's not remotely true. If I think they're a 90 win team, it's because I don't think they're a 100 win team. If I thought they were gonna get 100 wins...I'd say so.

I have never said they are a 100 win team.

Read each of my posts, I have never once said that. I have said they are capable of winning 100 games. If I think they are a 90 win team, that would imply that I think they are capable of winning 100 games, or losing 80 games. If you are within 5 wins of your projected final record for a team, you did a pretty good job of guessing their record.


Pot, meet kettle. The irony is killing me.
By saying a team is capable of winning 100 games is not wrong. Saying a team is incapable of doing something that is in the relm of possibility is wrong. You can't say it can't be done, even if the probability is low. My initial issue with VRP's post is that he said they can't win 100 games. Well yes they very well could. It doesn't mean it's likely, but they very well could. You can't say never in baseball. Surely you recognize this. If you don't, then you are either completely ignoring possibilities in baseball or haven't been following the discussion and decided to jump in without reading.



I
didn't post in any thread but in the prediction thread or the preview I said the Rays were a top 8 organization (despite what others said) and that I believed they would go to the playoffs (and be ahead of Boston). So drop the I was alone crap.
Sure seemed like I was the only one posting about them last March/April in the MLB section. Constant posts about how they were going to fall dramatically because of all the players they lost.

Good for you if you recognized it as well, I wasn't trying to toot my own horn about being right about the Rays. But saying I am clearly wrong about the Rays this year is the exact same thing I heard last year when I was in the minority.




So they're improved over the 91 win team. Not over the 96 win team. The 96 win team had guys like Carl Crawford posting career years. Good as Jennings is, he's not at that level yet.
And they can still produce a 100 win season. Not likely, but it's possible.


They also had an insanely good bullpen, led by Benoit and Soriano among others who had career years. Something their bullpen is currently lacking.
And we know that 50 inning sample sizes can give us extreme outliers in one direction or the other. And we also know that the Rays have managed to successfully rebuild their bullpen each year. It is reasonable to think that could happen again.


The 2012 team has some very good strengths, but this is a team with just enough flaws that will prevent it from winning 100. Which doesn't mean it's bad. It just means that it's unrealistic to expect them to be capable of 100 wins. Their top 3 guys had 50-60 innings of sub 3 FIP/ERA. Two guys had ERA under 2. They're just not on that level.
They may not be, but they are still capable. Literally the only word I have used to describe their possibility of reaching 100 wins.


It doesn't even matter if they win 100 games. Because in baseball what we should care about is what's realistic, based on what we know at the time, when we project something. And projecting 100 wins, just isn't realistic.
And I never did project them to win 100 games.

I said




The Yankees will be fine, 90 wins no problem. But this Rays team could even be a 100 win team. They are really that good.

And I was met with posts 'laughing out loud' at this.

GasMan
04-10-2012, 06:37 PM
I thought this was about teams that lost the first 3 games not about TB.

Twitchy
04-10-2012, 08:18 PM
I fully agree, but the Rays might very well be the best in that division, it's possible.

But not realistic. That's the point. Their starting pitching might be better than the Yankees, but not by enough to offset the gap in bullpens and the lineup.


The Rays are clearly a better team than both the Royals and Pirates.


The point was about you saying it was possible. It's possible the Royals and Pirates do it, but not likely. And as you just proved, we're concerned with what's realistic, what's not possible.


As said above, not probable, but possible.

Right.


No, I don't. I don't like someone trying to bash my opinion because 'two other' people agree with them. That's a really juvenile route to have taken this argument. Especially when I had not brought up anything even close to that. I said they are capable, and his response is, well 'these two guys laughed out loud when I said you think that'. That's petty and childish and does not mean I care what other people think.


They're not bashing your opinion. You're making outlandish claims that aren't realistic, and the fact that many well respected posters with regards to MLB does hold some weight. It's not like he asked some random guy with 10 posts who doesn't know his RBI from his stolen bases.

You're welcome to your opinion, but given that this is a forum, and we're having a debate, where pretty much everyone unanimously agrees you're wrong...well...it should be a sign maybe you're slightly off base.


And 15th in ERA. I agree, their periphials were not that great, but they were basically neutral in WPA in 2011. They were close to the middle of the pack.


Jesus Christ. Their ERA was that good because of ballpark factors and good defence. Their bullpen was absolute trash. I can't believe you'd argue otherwise.

You can't seriously argue that relievers ERA is remotely reliable when you've been using advanced stats in every other argument. This is the kind of crap JD, VRP and others are pointing out when they're saying you're being pretentious and unreasonable.

This isn't close. We're not arguing about 4.4 WAR being better than 4.2 WAR. This is plain and simple a horrible bullpen.

You're better than this.


Who projected them to make the playoffs in 2008? Were they not the surprise team of the decade that year?


I believe it was Nate Silver (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/02/26/leap.year0303/). Maybe not the playoffs, but he projected a 22 win increase. He was under by about 9 or 10 wins. People who knew what they were talking about knew the Rays would be a damn good team in 08.


I have never said they are a 100 win team.

Read each of my posts, I have never once said that. I have said they are capable of winning 100 games. If I think they are a 90 win team, that would imply that I think they are capable of winning 100 games, or losing 80 games. If you are within 5 wins of your projected final record for a team, you did a pretty good job of guessing their record.

Ok, but the point is you're the only person who thinks they're capable of winning 100 games. There's a lot of smart people on this site, and a lot of people who evaluate stuff differently. And people who watch/follow baseball who look at things from different perspectives - advanced stats, scouting, traditional stats - everyone here on this forum is in agreement this team is not capable of winning 100 games.

You can argue till you're blue in the face that they are. But the fact that everybody disagrees with you should be a sign here.

You're not the guy arguing the world is round and nobody will believe you. That's what you're acting like. The Rays are a good, although flawed team. They aren't realistically capable of winning 100 games. I'm glad you think so, but nobody else agrees.


By saying a team is capable of winning 100 games is not wrong.

No, it's just crazy in this case.


Saying a team is incapable of doing something that is in the relm of possibility is wrong.

...But nobody thinks its within the realm of possibility except you. That's the point. I can't stress this any more than I already have. Nobody thinks it is remotely possible but you.


You can't say it can't be done, even if the probability is low.

I keep stressing that while it's theoretically possible, it's realistically not going to happen. I don't care about the 1% chance it could happen. I care about the 99% chance that it won't.

That kind of thinking is why lotteries are known as "Idiot Tax". I could win even if the odds are low, so I'll keep buying in the off chance I win. I guess I could win, but it's not realistic.


My initial issue with VRP's post is that he said they can't win 100 games. Well yes they very well could. It doesn't mean it's likely, but they very well could.

So then your issue is semantics, because it's pretty clear nobody else thinks that realistically the Rays win 100 games. And the more I think about it, the more I agree with VRP.


You can't say never in baseball. Surely you recognize this.

It's funny, I made this exact point in my last post with the Royals and Pirates and you basically disagreed.


If you don't, then you are either completely ignoring possibilities in baseball or haven't been following the discussion and decided to jump in without reading.


Uh huh. It's much more likely that I didn't read what you or VRP said than the fact that I read what you said, read what VRP said, thought what you said was completely unrealistic, and decided to point out how unrealistic you were.

Yeah, I'm sure that's the case. It's much more likely that I didn't bother reading several pages of junk than it is that I randomly joined in an argument. You know, especially after being informed of what you were saying, noting that I couldn't believe you were seriously arguing this. And then I found out you were. Which led to me respond. Which, you know, means I did read it.


I Sure seemed like I was the only one posting about them last March/April in the MLB section. Constant posts about how they were going to fall dramatically because of all the players they lost.


You weren't. Not by a long shot.


Good for you if you recognized it as well, I wasn't trying to toot my own horn about being right about the Rays. But saying I am clearly wrong about the Rays this year is the exact same thing I heard last year when I was in the minority.


It's one thing to suggest that the Rays won't fall off the map. It's another thing to suggest that because they had a superior team in 2010 thanks to career years from guys who are no longer on the team like CC (7.6 WAR), Soriano (1.5 WAR 2.81 FIP), Benoit (1.5 WAR 2.43 FIP), Balfour (1.1 WAR 2.68 FIP) that they'll be remotely as good in 2012. Considering that no OF is capable of matching the 7.6 WAR CC put up, or the fact that last year not a single reliever had ONE war, let alone only two were above .5.

Using that as an argument to support why the Rays are somehow going to win 100 games, is why you're so off base that it's not even funny. Yes, Longoria is healthy. Yes, having Moore for a full season will be awesome. Yes, Jennings will play a full season (but let's ignore the fact he hit way over his head and thus will provide slightly more value in significantly more PA making the impact smaller than you think).


And they can still produce a 100 win season. Not likely, but it's possible.


Who cares if it's possible? The Royals could "possibly" win the World Series. Doesn't mean it's likely to happen. We care about realistic and likely events, not probables for the sake of hypothetical arguments.


And we know that 50 inning sample sizes can give us extreme outliers in one direction or the other. And we also know that the Rays have managed to successfully rebuild their bullpen each year. It is reasonable to think that could happen again.


But they didn't successfully rebuild their pen. Their park factors and defence hide the fact it's a crappy bullpen. That's a flaw. It's worse than it's been in years, and with Farnsworth out for a while (one of the only reliable guys) there's a legitimate weakness here.



And I was met with posts 'laughing out loud' at this.

Yeah, they were laughing out loud because it's crazy to say they could win 100 games. Because it is funny.

It boggles my mind why you would even say or care that it's possible. Anything is possible. Nobody cares about what is possible. We care about what's realistic. And you're not being remotely realistic.

JDIsMyGod23
04-10-2012, 08:29 PM
This is for Twitchy...

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/18205767/images/1330912219544.gif

Jeffy25
04-10-2012, 08:50 PM
They're not bashing your opinion. You're making outlandish claims that aren't realistic, and the fact that many well respected posters with regards to MLB does hold some weight. It's not like he asked some random guy with 10 posts who doesn't know his RBI from his stolen bases.

You're welcome to your opinion, but given that this is a forum, and we're having a debate, where pretty much everyone unanimously agrees you're wrong...well...it should be a sign maybe you're slightly off base.

Ok, but the point is you're the only person who thinks they're capable of winning 100 games. There's a lot of smart people on this site, and a lot of people who evaluate stuff differently. And people who watch/follow baseball who look at things from different perspectives - advanced stats, scouting, traditional stats - everyone here on this forum is in agreement this team is not capable of winning 100 games.

You can argue till you're blue in the face that they are. But the fact that everybody disagrees with you should be a sign here.

You're not the guy arguing the world is round and nobody will believe you. That's what you're acting like. The Rays are a good, although flawed team. They aren't realistically capable of winning 100 games. I'm glad you think so, but nobody else agrees.


...But nobody thinks its within the realm of possibility except you. That's the point. I can't stress this any more than I already have. Nobody thinks it is remotely possible but you.



I keep stressing that while it's theoretically possible, it's realistically not going to happen. I don't care about the 1% chance it could happen. I care about the 99% chance that it won't.

So then your issue is semantics, because it's pretty clear nobody else thinks that realistically the Rays win 100 games. And the more I think about it, the more I agree with VRP.


I'm clearly not the only person that thinks this.

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?t=710657

16 out of 46 posters thus far agree with me. It isn't that outlandish, and as stated several times, I have more of an issue with someone saying they can't win 100 games, when they certainly can. Not that they will, that they can.





It's one thing to suggest that the Rays won't fall off the map. It's another thing to suggest that because they had a superior team in 2010 thanks to career years from guys who are no longer on the team like CC (7.6 WAR), Soriano (1.5 WAR 2.81 FIP), Benoit (1.5 WAR 2.43 FIP), Balfour (1.1 WAR 2.68 FIP) that they'll be remotely as good in 2012. Considering that no OF is capable of matching the 7.6 WAR CC put up, or the fact that last year not a single reliever had ONE war, let alone only two were above .5.

Using that as an argument to support why the Rays are somehow going to win 100 games, is why you're so off base that it's not even funny. Yes, Longoria is healthy. Yes, having Moore for a full season will be awesome. Yes, Jennings will play a full season (but let's ignore the fact he hit way over his head and thus will provide slightly more value in significantly more PA making the impact smaller than you think).
I didn't use it as an argument, you did, but I didn't.

Their 2010 team may have won 96 games, but I'm not comparing 2011 to 2010 by way of assuming what they can do in 2012. I am saying based on 2011 and the pieces they have coming back that they could possibly be a 100 win team.




Who cares if it's possible? The Royals could "possibly" win the World Series. Doesn't mean it's likely to happen. We care about realistic and likely events, not probables for the sake of hypothetical arguments.

The Rays still have some level of decent possibility. It's not high, I don't think any team has even a 2% chance of reaching 100 wins this year. But the Rays are one of a few teams that have the capabilities of reaching 100 wins this year.



But they didn't successfully rebuild their pen. Their park factors and defence hide the fact it's a crappy bullpen. That's a flaw. It's worse than it's been in years, and with Farnsworth out for a while (one of the only reliable guys) there's a legitimate weakness here.
That may be, there should be about 350-400 innings out of their pen this year, I'm not so sure how good it will be, it might be their greatest weakness and an achilles heel to them reaching that many wins.





Yeah, they were laughing out loud because it's crazy to say they could win 100 games. Because it is funny.
You realize how foolish people look when a team actually does this. It isn't unrealistic for the Rays to do this. We aren't talking about some 70 win team coming out of nowhere and making up 30 wins. We are talking about a mid 90's win team making up 5-10 wins.


It boggles my mind why you would even say or care that it's possible. Anything is possible. Nobody cares about what is possible. We care about what's realistic. And you're not being remotely realistic.

I really don't care that much, my responses have been fueled by people saying it's simply not possible, when it absolutely is. I don't think it's that realistic, but you can't say it's impossible, because it isn't. And that's what several posters in here have said.

So why post after me for arguing something that might be unrealistic? You could just as easily argue against the people that say something that is possible isn't possible.

VRP723
04-10-2012, 11:56 PM
Another thing worth mentioning is the way Jeffy said it initially was "the Yankees are a 90 win team, but this Rays team could win 100 games, they're that good"

To a normal person, that sounds like you're saying the Rays are better than the Yankees, and that you think there's a good possibility that the Rays can win 100 games. You can backtrack and defend yourself with technicalities, but it's obvious what you initially said, and it was ludicrous.

chitownbears89
04-11-2012, 12:03 AM
Really, It's been 3 games.

YankeesR#2
04-11-2012, 07:50 AM
so there is 34% who dislikes the Yanks wow thought it was higher:clap::clap: also you think the world votes on this......now I've read it all!!! comedy!!!

It is higher but the question they asked was which 0 and 3 team was in the most trouble not which team had the most obnoxious fans.

... and yes I do believe "the world" votes on this. There is this internet thing and people all over the world can access it . From US soldiers in foreign bases to mlb fans in different countries.

You really have to get out more often. Maybe after 13,000 posts you've finally ran out of things to say.

Pinstripe pride
04-11-2012, 09:15 AM
How good can the bullpen really be with Fernando Rodney pitching?

rays made kyle farnsworth productive last year, so you never know

oak2455
04-11-2012, 09:20 AM
Yanks win!!!

"Ace"ves
04-11-2012, 09:43 AM
First of all, what are we arguing? If a team can be a 100-win team?

1) All teams are capable of 100 wins
2) Few teams are probable in winning 100 wins, but Id say Yankees, Red Sox, Rays, Tigers, Angels, Rangers are all AL teams capable (im not going to touch the NL because there is a lot of balance IMO).

Here is the issue as I see it. The argument aren't clear cut, there is a lot of unnecessary comments being made. State your opinion clearly and do not deviate.

So Jeffy, I agree with your logic, but please don't deviate by referring to your support for the Rays last year because that is irrelevant and won't help your argument. I know people are giving you a hard time, but if you bring in these little irrelevant comments or start arguing how to be polite on PSD, you are going to just going to get more hate.

Most people agree with you that the Rays are a good team, so there is no point in arguing that they are a good team/playoff team, most agree with you.


It is higher but the question they asked was which 0 and 3 team was in the most trouble not which team had the most obnoxious fans.

... and yes I do believe "the world" votes on this. There is this internet thing and people all over the world can access it . From US soldiers in foreign bases to mlb fans in different countries.

You really have to get out more often. Maybe after 13,000 posts you've finally ran out of things to say.

Now as for you, do you really think the yankees being voted as "most concerned" means that we should really be concerned? get real, they have the most votes because they are the yankees. before the season started, they were voted AL East favorites.... so 3 games changes that? YAWN.

And you must be kidding me with the user name... really? you're not obsessed at all, it's okay, further proof that baseball revolves around the yankees.

Algmuskrats
04-11-2012, 10:55 AM
I think all the teams will be okay.

RTL
04-11-2012, 03:23 PM
I have the Rays winning the East and think they are better than the Yankees so I really don't see the big deal here.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 03:27 PM
Once you get by Ellsbury (still a non factor this year), Pedroia and Gonzalez, the Redsox are pretty brutal.

Not the team they once were, that's for sure.

Jeffy25
04-11-2012, 03:57 PM
Another thing worth mentioning is the way Jeffy said it initially was "the Yankees are a 90 win team, but this Rays team could win 100 games, they're that good"

To a normal person, that sounds like you're saying the Rays are better than the Yankees, and that you think there's a good possibility that the Rays can win 100 games. You can backtrack and defend yourself with technicalities, but it's obvious what you initially said, and it was ludicrous.

How is that ludicrous?

Both are 90 wins teams, but to think the Rays are better than the Yankees is ludicrous?

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 04:16 PM
Once you get by Ellsbury (still a non factor this year), Pedroia and Gonzalez, the Redsox are pretty brutal.

Not the team they once were, that's for sure.

Yeah. Ortiz, Youk, Crawford are all brutal. Same with Lester, Beckett, Buchholz, Bard. They all SUCK. :rolleyes:

You can start talking when your team finishes above 4th place.

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 04:30 PM
Ortiz is very old, Youk is clearly declining and Crawford....LOL

As for Lester, good guy.

Beckett will regress.

Buch needs to stay healthy and prove he can pitch a full season again.

Bard is a bullpen arm and currently a member in the very questionable rotation.

The pen is garbage.

Sox should be the most concerned.

1903
04-11-2012, 04:32 PM
Yeah. Ortiz, Youk, Crawford are all brutal. Same with Lester, Beckett, Buchholz, Bard. They all SUCK. :rolleyes:

You can start talking when your team finishes above 4th place.

Well Youkilis has been brutal so far this seasons along with Beckett, Bucholz, and Bard. Crawford was brutal last season and has not played yet this season. He has a point if he is talking about the season so far.

YankeesR#2
04-11-2012, 04:41 PM
............Now as for you, do you really think the yankees being voted as "most concerned" means that we should really be concerned? get real, they have the most votes because they are the yankees. before the season started, they were voted AL East favorites.... so 3 games changes that? YAWN.

And you must be kidding me with the user name... really? you're not obsessed at all, it's okay, further proof that baseball revolves around the yankees.

The reason I think the yankees should be concerned is not because they were voted most concerned, it is because they are paying $71,769,390 to players over the age of 35. It's not the eighties when everyone was on steroids and popping greenies. 35 is old again and so are the yankees.

As for my user name, The yankees are number two, I guess my attempt at toilet humor missed the mark but I'll keep it anyway.

The baseball world may indeed revolve around the yankees but that doesn't change the fact that they have spent well over two BILLION dollars this century in player salaries alone and have only one world series win to show for it.

That's why they should be worried, an 0 and 3 start could be an indication that the train is leaving they station.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 04:42 PM
Yeah. Ortiz, Youk, Crawford are all brutal. Same with Lester, Beckett, Buchholz, Bard. They all SUCK. :rolleyes:

You can start talking when your team finishes above 4th place.
Ortiz is a stretch I guess.
Youk isn't that special anymore........ AT ALL.
Crawford needs no explanation.

Lester is phenomenal and Beckett will be phenomenal over time.
Buchholz isn't pitching and Bard's transition to back to the pen is inevitable.

Why get personal? If the Jays aren't a threat don't bring them into it. I don't expect the playoffs for the Jays, you do however expect the playoffs as a Red Sox fan. It doesn't look promising.

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 04:45 PM
Ortiz is very old

He did great last year...


Youk is clearly declining

Yeah, 6 games...


Crawford....LOL

Yeah, check out his numbers before his ONE bad year.... LOL to you.


As for Lester, good guy.

Beckett will regress.

Says who, you? :laugh2:


Buch needs to stay healthy and prove he can pitch a full season again

Why, because he was injured last year?


Bard is a bullpen arm and currently a member in the very questionable rotation.

The Red Sox rotation is just as good, if not better then the Yankees. You have no room to talk there.


The pen is garbage.

Yeah, it's not like our closer is injured...


Well Youkilis has been brutal so far this seasons along with Beckett, Bucholz, and Bard. Crawford was brutal last season and has not played yet this season. He has a point if he is talking about the season so far.

Yes, 6 games = Full season. 6, get that number in your head.

So lets say... Jose Bautista. By your logic he sucks because he hasn't started out the year good... Yeah, think that over.

Also, the Sox are on the road.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 04:45 PM
The reason I think the yankees should be concerned is not because they were voted most concerned, it is because they are paying $71,769,390 to players over the age of 35. It's not the eighties when everyone was on steroids and popping greenies. 35 is old again and so are the yankees.

As for my user name, The yankees are number two, I guess my attempt at toilet humor missed the mark but I'll keep it anyway.

The baseball world may indeed revolve around the yankees but that doesn't change the fact that they have spent well over two BILLION dollars this century in player salaries alone and have only one world series win to show for it.

That's why they should be worried, an 0 and 3 start could be an indication that the train is leaving they station.
As much as I dislike the Yanks they have Cano, Granderson and Teix in the prime of their careers. Jeter and ARod may not be replaceable, but they still one of the best middle of the orders in the league without them.
Their pitching is the issue, just all around question marks without any impact guys coming up. Greinke is on the record saying he doesn't want to pitch for the Yanks. Is Hamels an option?

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 04:45 PM
The reason I think the yankees should be concerned is not because they were voted most concerned, it is because they are paying $71,769,390 to players over the age of 35. It's not the eighties when everyone was on steroids and popping greenies. 35 is old again and so are the yankees.

As for my user name, The yankees are number two, I guess my attempt at toilet humor missed the mark but I'll keep it anyway.

The baseball world may indeed revolve around the yankees but that doesn't change the fact that they have spent well over two BILLION dollars this century in player salaries alone and have only one world series win to show for it.

That's why they should be worried, an 0 and 3 start could be an indication that the train is leaving they station.

Rivera is still the best, or easily one of. Arod is still pretty darn good himself. Jeter looks like he MIGHT be in for a good year so far.

Thats the 71 million right there...and they're still productive players.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 04:48 PM
He did great last year...

Yeah, 6 games...

Yeah, check out his numbers before his ONE bad year.... LOL to you.

Says who, you? :laugh2:
.
Why, because he was injured last year?

The Red Sox rotation is just as good, if not better then the Yankees. You have no room to talk there.

Yes, 6 games = Full season. 6, get that number in your head.

So lets say... Jose Bautista. By your logic he sucks because he hasn't started out the year good... Yeah, think that over.

Also, the Sox are on the road.
Ortiz old, end of discussion. The decline is inevitable.
Youk has been on the decline for more than 6 games. He should have been traded the day AGon came aboard.
Buch was a non factor last year and appears to be on the same path this year.
Aside from the Lester/CC wash, Yanks have a better pitcher at every spot in the order.
Jose Bautista is very unlikely to be as effective as he was last year, he looks PUTRID out there. I don't defend it.

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 04:50 PM
Ortiz is a stretch I guess.

He should regress, but he's nowhere near "brutal".


Youk isn't that special anymore........ AT ALL.

6 games.


Crawford needs no explanation.

After one bad season?


Lester is phenomenal and Beckett will be phenomenal over time.
Buchholz isn't pitching and Bard's transition to back to the pen is inevitable.

Buchholz and Bard could both do great, or they could both do terrible. It's to early to tell.


Why get personal? If the Jays aren't a threat don't bring them into it. I don't expect the playoffs for the Jays

Because you said the Sox whole team is brutal...


You do however expect the playoffs as a Red Sox fan. It doesn't look promising.

6 games. Honestly, 6 games. That is all.

Bo Sox Fan
04-11-2012, 04:51 PM
Once again I am not concerned. Our pitching has actually been our strength through 4 of the 6 games played, just wait till we start swinging the bats with regularity. Boston fans will be laghing at all the current doubters and haters that think this team is washed up when in fact %95 of em are in there prime.

It's another slow start just like last year, but only a matter of days to weeks when we start hanging 14 runs on teams like Toronto and winning series after series after series again.

You'll see

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 04:53 PM
He did great last year...



Yeah, 6 games...



Yeah, check out his numbers before his ONE bad year.... LOL to you.



Says who, you? :laugh2:



Why, because he was injured last year?



The Red Sox rotation is just as good, if not better then the Yankees. You have no room to talk there.



Yeah, it's not like our closer is injured...



Yes, 6 games = Full season. 6, get that number in your head.

So lets say... Jose Bautista. By your logic he sucks because he hasn't started out the year good... Yeah, think that over.

Also, the Sox are on the road.

Ortiz did do great, but he's old and overweight. Not that it means anything for sure, but he could be a candidate to have a bad year.

Beckett had by far the best season of his career last year and at the age of 31. He also has had nagging injuries for most of his career and already has had an issue with his hand this year. I'll be willing to bet money he won't have a 6+ WAR year again.

Crawford has had a solid career, but he's 30 now and not only is he recovering from the wrist, but now his elbow is messed up too. Good luck with that one. Extremely overrated player, always has been.

As for Buccholz, you answered your own question. Yes, he needs to stay healthy and pitch a full season. He had one good year, thats it. All the potential in the world doesn't guarantee a thing.

Yankees pitching is better than Boston's. We have fewer question marks and by far better depth.

1903
04-11-2012, 04:53 PM
Yes, 6 games = Full season. 6, get that number in your head.

So lets say... Jose Bautista. By your logic he sucks because he hasn't started out the year good... Yeah, think that over.

Also, the Sox are on the road.

I guess you missed the part where I said "so far this season." I did not make any predictions for the rest of the season. I only commented on what has happend so far and all those I have mentioned have been brutal so far this season. Before you get emotional over my post you may want to take the time to carefully read it.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 04:53 PM
He should regress, but he's nowhere near "brutal".

6 games.

After one bad season?

Buchholz and Bard could both do great, or they could both do terrible. It's to early to tell.

Because you said the Sox whole team is brutal...

6 games. Honestly, 6 games. That is all.
I already said brutal was a stretch, my bad!
Last year was a disaster for Youk.......:confused:
You're only as good as your last year. I know this as a Lind/Hill observer.
Bard looked much better than what his pitching line said, I'll give you that.
Now I said their whole team is brutal? Go back and read what I typed.

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 04:54 PM
Once again I am not concerned. Our pitching has actually been our strength through 4 of the 6 games played, just wait till we start swinging the bats with regularity. Boston fans will be laghing at all the current doubters and haters that think this team is washed up when in fact %95 of em are in there prime.

It's another slow start just like last year, but only a matter of days to weeks when we start hanging 14 runs on teams like Toronto and winning series after series after series again.

You'll see

Other than Lester, your pitching has been terrible.

Beckett and Clay were torched. Aceves and Melancon haven't pitched great either.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 04:55 PM
I guess you missed the part where I said "so far this season." I did not make any predictions for the rest of the season. I only commented on what has happend so far and all those I have mentioned have been brutal so far this season. Before you get emotional over my post you may want to take the time to carefully read it.
No kidding right? "Which 0-3 team should be the most concerned?"

Can you read Mr. Green Monster?

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 04:55 PM
Ortiz old, end of discussion. The decline is inevitable.
Youk has been on the decline for more than 6 games. He should have been traded the day AGon came aboard.
Buch was a non factor last year and appears to be on the same path this year.
Aside from the Lester/CC wash, Yanks have a better pitcher at every spot in the order.
Jose Bautista is very unlikely to be as effective as he was last year, he looks PUTRID out there. I don't defend it.

As much as I hate >=< comparisons, lego.

Lester = CC (Wash)
Beckett >= Pineda (Beckett can pitch in the Al East, can Pineda?)
Buchholz >= Kuroda (Buch can pitch in the Al East, can Kuroda?)
Doubront < Nova (Nova had very good year.)
Bard >=< Garcia/Hughes (This one can go anyway.)

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 04:57 PM
Ortiz did do great, but he's old and overweight. Not that it means anything for sure, but he could be a candidate to have a bad year.

Beckett had by far the best season of his career last year and at the age of 31. He also has had nagging injuries for most of his career and already has had an issue with his hand this year. I'll be willing to bet money he won't have a 6+ WAR year again.

Crawford has had a solid career, but he's 30 now and not only is he recovering from the wrist, but now his elbow is messed up too. Good luck with that one. Extremely overrated player, always has been.

As for Buccholz, you answered your own question. Yes, he needs to stay healthy and pitch a full season. He had one good year, thats it. All the potential in the world doesn't guarantee a thing.

Yankees pitching is better than Boston's. We have fewer question marks and by far better depth.

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?t=708497

Look at some of your "veteran" posters.

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 05:00 PM
Once you get by Ellsbury (still a non factor this year), Pedroia and Gonzalez, the Redsox are pretty brutal.

Not the team they once were, that's for sure.


I already said brutal was a stretch, my bad!
Last year was a disaster for Youk.......:confused:
You're only as good as your last year. I know this as a Lind/Hill observer.
Bard looked much better than what his pitching line said, I'll give you that.
Now I said their whole team is brutal? Go back and read what I typed.

I read it... Same results...

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 05:00 PM
As much as I hate >=< comparisons, lego.

Lester = CC (Wash)
Beckett >= Pineda (Beckett can pitch in the Al East, can Pineda?)
Buchholz >= Kuroda (Buch can pitch in the Al East, can Kuroda?)
Doubront < Nova (Nova had very good year.)
Bard >=< Garcia/Hughes (This one can go anyway.)
As an unbiased opinion who hates both teams equally.

Lester=CC
Beckett>Pineda (I could question this for days)
Buchholz<Kuroda (Don't discredit Kuroda because of his age. Better pitcher in '12)
Doubront<Nova (Doubront has nice stuff, I'm a fan)
Bard<Garcia/Hughes (Bard got roughed up by the slumping Blue Jay bats. I just don't see this transition working)

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 05:00 PM
http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?t=708497

Look at some of your "veteran" posters.

I see a lot of them voicing exactly what I did.

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 05:01 PM
Other than Lester, your pitching has been terrible.

Beckett and Clay were torched. Aceves and Melancon haven't pitched great either.

The Yankees rotation was also horrible.


No kidding right? "Which 0-3 team should be the most concerned?"

Can you read Mr. Green Monster?

Yes, and it's only been 6 games... Can you read?

Damn, the trolls are going hard right now!

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 05:01 PM
I read it... Same results...
Once you get by Ellsbury, Pedroia and Gonzalez, the Red Sox are pretty brutal.

No mention of pitching, just their mediocre bats. I already said Ortiz deserved to be mentioned with the other three.

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 05:02 PM
Like I said, Lester is good, Beckett will regress (though he is still good) after that its all questions. Yankees may or may not have as good as a top 3 (though I think its debatable), but the back end, depth, and bullpen give them the advantage.

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 05:02 PM
I see a lot of them voicing exactly what I did.

I said "veteran posters". Try again.

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 05:03 PM
The Yankees rotation was also horrible.


Cool.

I never said it was our strength thus far, though.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 05:04 PM
Another thing I completely forgot about.....

That Red Sox bullpen is shameful.

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 05:04 PM
Once you get by Ellsbury, Pedroia and Gonzalez, the Red Sox are pretty brutal.

No mention of pitching, just their mediocre bats. I already said Ortiz deserved to be mentioned with the other three.


Like I said, Lester is good, Beckett will regress (though he is still good) after that its all questions. Yankees may or may not have as good as a top 3 (though I think its debatable), but the back end, depth, and bullpen give them the advantage.

Hughes, Pineda, Garcia, Nova aren't all questions?

Bo Sox Fan
04-11-2012, 05:05 PM
This is cute, Yankees and Jays fans hopping all over Red Sox fans while they can because they know it's just a matter of time until our boys wake up.

Enjoy your small sample size NY and TO, since 6 games dictates a 162 game. The Sox haven't even seen Fenway Park yet this season since leaving Spring Training, but since you goofs think were finished well... haha wow, just wow I don't know what to say.

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 05:06 PM
Another thing I completely forgot about.....

That Red Sox bullpen is shameful.

AFTER 6 GAMES? ALSO THERE CLOSER IS INJURED!

Is that big enought font for you? Try reading through it slower.

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 05:07 PM
Hughes, Pineda, Garcia, Nova aren't all questions?

Never said they weren't.

I would exclude Garcia from that equation, he's a vet and will give you innings of solid performance.

Difference being that we have the other three, as well as Pettitte for depth. They will not all pan out, but one or two should.

What about Boston? They don't have the depth and Daisuke blows. They also don't have the pen that the Yankees do.

I get what you're trying to get at, but we have a deeper pitching staff.

Green_Monster
04-11-2012, 05:07 PM
Anyway, off topic. I'll let the Red Sox play speak for itself.

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 05:09 PM
This is cute, Yankees and Jays fans hopping all over Red Sox fans while they can because they know it's just a matter of time until our boys wake up.

Enjoy your small sample size NY and TO, since 6 games dictates a 162 game. The Sox haven't even seen Fenway Park yet this season since leaving Spring Training, but since you goofs think were finished well... haha wow, just wow I don't know what to say.

No one thinks you're finished.

We all agree though that this "We're the elite team of the east" attitude that you and others carry is stupid.

Of the top three East teams the Sox have more holes than the Rays and Yankees do. (Sorry Jays fans!)

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 05:34 PM
Hughes, Pineda, Garcia, Nova aren't all questions?

I actually think all AL East teams with the exception of the Rays have HUGE rotation questions.

We're relying on Hughes, Doubront, Drabek, Bard, etc.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 05:36 PM
No one thinks you're finished.

We all agree though that this "We're the elite team of the east" attitude that you and others carry is stupid.

Of the top three East teams the Sox have more holes than the Rays and Yankees do. (Sorry Jays fans!)
You'll see the Jays soon and understand how good they are.

Twitchy
04-11-2012, 05:36 PM
AFTER 6 GAMES? ALSO THERE CLOSER IS INJURED!

Is that big enought font for you? Try reading through it slower.

In fairness, the closer is kind of a huge injury risk so that's not really a defence. It'd be like complaining that Rich Harden or Erik Bedard is injured. There's a reason the price was so low on Bailey.

bomber0104
04-11-2012, 06:06 PM
Now, after watching the Sox play the Jays, i'm even more convinced about my previous opinion

I looked at that Red Sox lineup on opening day and all i can think of is "thats it?". Since when do the Red Sox depend on guys like Ross, Sweeney, Aviles, Saltalamachia to fill out half of their lineup?

Not to mention Youkillis struggles last year and constant healthy concerns.

And i still have the same feelings about the rotation and Pen. I dont believe Dubront, Bard, and Buchholz will have good years and I question Beckett big time.. he's a year on year off kind of guy and last year was his great year

YEDN90
04-11-2012, 06:07 PM
You'll see the Jays soon and understand how good they are.

They're a good club, but it wouldnt be fair to put them with the other three just yet

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 06:26 PM
Now, after watching the Sox play the Jays, i'm even more convinced about my previous opinion

I looked at that Red Sox lineup on opening day and all i can think of is "thats it?". Since when do the Red Sox depend on guys like Ross, Sweeney, Aviles, Saltalamachia to fill out half of their lineup?

Not to mention Youkillis struggles last year and constant healthy concerns.

And i still have the same feelings about the rotation and Pen. I dont believe Dubront, Bard, and Buchholz will have good years and I question Beckett big time.. he's a year on year off kind of guy and last year was his great year
My thoughts to the tee.

In comparison, the Yanks scare the ***** out of me.

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 06:27 PM
They're a good club, but it wouldnt be fair to put them with the other three just yet
Nope, but you won't be so quick to jump the gun on them being that other AL East team.

Mell413
04-11-2012, 06:30 PM
I can't wait until the world catches up with you Jeffy and acknowledges how good the Rays are. Really though, get over yourself. We get it you know how to read articles on Fangraphs, that doesn't make you Theo Epstein. That holier-than-thou attitude that you and a few others around here have is getting unbearable, and is a main reason a lot of good posters stopped coming around. Just stop.

Admittedly we don't see eye to eye on things often, but I actually agree with this

VRP723
04-11-2012, 06:33 PM
Lol, I never noticed we don't see eye to eye on things often!

"Ace"ves
04-11-2012, 07:53 PM
The reason I think the yankees should be concerned is not because they were voted most concerned, it is because they are paying $71,769,390 to players over the age of 35. It's not the eighties when everyone was on steroids and popping greenies. 35 is old again and so are the yankees.

As for my user name, The yankees are number two, I guess my attempt at toilet humor missed the mark but I'll keep it anyway.

The baseball world may indeed revolve around the yankees but that doesn't change the fact that they have spent well over two BILLION dollars this century in player salaries alone and have only one world series win to show for it.

That's why they should be worried, an 0 and 3 start could be an indication that the train is leaving they station.

Of course the yankees are old, that's the risk you run with these lucrative contracts. But the money is slowly coming off the books and that's more $$ that can be spent on more big name FAs. There is a transitioning point coming up soon, but why worry? I don't think you fully comprehend how much money this organization has and is willing to spend. Also consider the young talent coming up.

The main slots to fill will be A-rod, Jeter, Rivera. If you are counting rentals/bench players, then you're not being reasonable because veteran backups are advantageous (Ibanez, Jones, Chavez)

As of right now, there is :

1) No immediate concern to move A-rod, he has a few more years before he'll need to be a DH, at that point there may be Wright up for grabs or another overrated 3B. Or maybe they'll give Laird a shot. Probably their toughest change.

2) Nunez will replace Jeter when he retires unless a trade is made for a shortstop.

3) Rafael Soriano/David Robertson to fill that role (NOT RIVERA, but then again no one is)... plus its not hard to replace closers, look at Boston this past offseason.

So an 0-3 start is a sign that A-rod, Jeter, and Rivera are washed up? I'm sorry but read a box score because Jeter is producing more than any other yankee hitter right now. A-rod's is "slumping" but has had decent plate appearances and fielding. Rivera blew one save and has been good in his other appearance. So you are either OVERREACTING or trying to get a rise out of yankee fans. Me, you won't get a rise out of me, I'm just going to tell you how it is.

And btw, your idea of "humor" is quite comical. You may not realize it, but your screenname says more about you than you realize. It reveals that you are basing your entire baseball premise on the yankees losing rather than your favorite team winning (whichever team it may be).

What does spending a billion dollars for 1 World Series have to do with an 0-3 start in 2012? Remember 2009? They had an 0-2 start... so i guess losing that one extra game means complete collapse? Your logic is comical. And btw, do you really think fans CARE that their organization had to spend more money to win? Most fans are PROUD their organization cares enough to reinvest their money for a future product and not settle with mediocrity.

mtf
04-11-2012, 08:23 PM
Quote from "Ace"ves:
* (Sorry, the editor is screwing up the quote, presumably because of the odd structure of your user name).

Of course the yankees are old, that's the risk you run with these lucrative contracts. But the money is slowly coming off the books and that's more $$ that can be spent on more big name FAs. There is a transitioning point coming up soon, but why worry? I don't think you fully comprehend how much money this organization has and is willing to spend. Also consider the young talent coming up.

I'm not saying that you're wrong by any means, but I'm just curious what's coming off the books? I know Jeter and Rivera are on their way out, but if I remember correctly, Cano is due to hit free agency at the end of the 2012 season and Granderson follows him in 2013.

Also, didn't Hal Steinbrenner say he planned to bring down the payroll to stay under the new luxury cap? I remember hearing about that, and just googling it provided me with this story (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-yankees-steinbrenner), but I'm not sure on the accuracy of it.

In addition, if they did have spare money to throw around, I thought most free agents (especially from what are considered smaller-market teams) are being locked up before they hit free agency now leaving less options for the Yankees & Red Sox to continue with "business as usual".

Mitchell133
04-11-2012, 09:47 PM
Of course the yankees are old, that's the risk you run with these lucrative contracts. But the money is slowly coming off the books and that's more $$ that can be spent on more big name FAs. There is a transitioning point coming up soon, but why worry? I don't think you fully comprehend how much money this organization has and is willing to spend. Also consider the young talent coming up.

What does spending a billion dollars for 1 World Series have to do with an 0-3 start in 2012? Remember 2009? They had an 0-2 start... so i guess losing that one extra game means complete collapse? Your logic is comical. And btw, do you really think fans CARE that their organization had to spend more money to win? Most fans are PROUD their organization cares enough to reinvest their money for a future product and not settle with mediocrity.
So then you understand the risk. These lucrative contracts turn into old plays and thus you have ARod batting DH till 2017 and Teix playing 1st till 2016. Two players who's expectations lower each year, as an AL East rival I can't wait till 2014, never mind the years to follow.

Not sure how you expect to replace them with newer big name free agents, but uh good luck. Definitely LOTS of legitimate concern for down the road, however like you said not for 2012.

Comments like that remind me why I love to cheer against the Yanks. I was a Maple Leaf fan during the non salary capped NHL and I saw my team spend more than the others every year. Believer me without two/three of the greatest players of this generation (ARod/Jeter/Teix/Rivera).. It's not as easy as you think to build a winner.

"Ace"ves
04-12-2012, 01:19 AM
Quote from "Ace"ves:
* (Sorry, the editor is screwing up the quote, presumably because of the odd structure of your user name).

I'm not saying that you're wrong by any means, but I'm just curious what's coming off the books? I know Jeter and Rivera are on their way out, but if I remember correctly, Cano is due to hit free agency at the end of the 2012 season and Granderson follows him in 2013.

Also, didn't Hal Steinbrenner say he planned to bring down the payroll to stay under the new luxury cap? I remember hearing about that, and just googling it provided me with this story (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-yankees-steinbrenner), but I'm not sure on the accuracy of it.

In addition, if they did have spare money to throw around, I thought most free agents (especially from what are considered smaller-market teams) are being locked up before they hit free agency now leaving less options for the Yankees & Red Sox to continue with "business as usual".

Of course we are going to increase the payroll with guys like Cano and possibly Granderson, but Jeter and Rivera are a lot in terms of yearly salary. You can easily resign Granderson for Jeter's yearly salary or less (assuming you are giving him 5 year +). Now Cano's contract will be interesting, it will likely be lucrative, but with A-rod's eventual decrease in salary (slowly lowering his $30 million per year), it will even out nicely.

And yes they did say that the plan was to lower payroll, but I think it depends on their needs. Likely they will sign less lucrative players, but still highly productive players for a good price (such as Russell Martin, Freddy Garcia). I do not think they'd allow there to be a "rebuild" season where they don't go out to and get the pieces necessary for a competitive team. For that reason, I am not worried.

And you are correct, many players are being locked up, but not everyone. Eventually teams realize they cannot rebuild within a reasonable span and will trade their pieces (*see Athletics and their pitchers). Im glad we continued this conversation, I think we are on the same page for the most part.


So then you understand the risk. These lucrative contracts turn into old plays and thus you have ARod batting DH till 2017 and Teix playing 1st till 2016. Two players who's expectations lower each year, as an AL East rival I can't wait till 2014, never mind the years to follow.

Not sure how you expect to replace them with newer big name free agents, but uh good luck. Definitely LOTS of legitimate concern for down the road, however like you said not for 2012.

Comments like that remind me why I love to cheer against the Yanks. I was a Maple Leaf fan during the non salary capped NHL and I saw my team spend more than the others every year. Believer me without two/three of the greatest players of this generation (ARod/Jeter/Teix/Rivera).. It's not as easy as you think to build a winner.

I think the yankees will assess their value year by year. If A-rod/Teixeira can no longer produce, he won't be starting, trust me. Barry Zito became a bullpen guy at one point, Zambrano wasn't being started for behavioral issues one year. I do not see how an aging A-rod/Teixeira will be any worse than an aging Jeter/Posada/Rivera. Perhaps because we will want them to DH, but I think we are assuming too much about their future, Teixeira may be durable (Id think at least) in 2014.

Replacements may be equal, slightly better, slightly worse, but there is plenty of talent to be had. Who would've thought the yanks could place Mattingly... see Martinez (slightly worse)... or replace Martinez... see Giambi (slightly worse)... or replace Giambi... see Teixeira (slightly better). I don't think it's crazy. I think A-rod is a lot tougher to replace, but we don't NEED a big star at 3B necessarily, just a productive player. Trust me, there is talent, look at all the FAs without a job this year, if someone had to spend the money, they'd get a lot of talent for real cheap.

I never said it would be easy, you misunderstand. However we are talking about what team going 0-3 should we be most concerned about. How does lowering your star power in future years relate to going 0-3 in 2012... it doesn't. Now the yankees are 3-3, so that went right out the window because they played as good as they possibly could've since going 0-3.

I'm not worried... do I think they'll win a championship in 2014-2017, I have no idea. I think they'll make the playoffs most years, especially with this new wild card system, making it that much easier to be in the final 5 of the AL.

mtf
04-12-2012, 02:29 AM
I'm not worried... do I think they'll win a championship in 2014-2017, I have no idea. I think they'll make the playoffs most years, especially with this new wild card system, making it that much easier to be in the final 5 of the AL.

I do agree that the Yankees will likely be able to make one of the 2 wild card positions quite often in the next 5-8 years. They'll likely still be spending quite close to $189M annually, if they don't exceed it that is.

oak2455
04-12-2012, 07:35 AM
Yanks win again... Rolling

Kenny Powders
04-12-2012, 09:28 AM
Yanks win again... Rolling

I understand a win is a win, but having the Orioles take you to extra innings two games in a row isn't exactly rolling.

ShinobiNYC
04-12-2012, 10:02 AM
The Red Sox ONLY because they had a bad start last year too, and it took them an unbelievable .700 record to make it back(and even that wasn't enough because of their September). I don't see them going even .650 again this year if they have a bad start, their pitching is not good enough(especially the bullpen).

Shamrock
04-12-2012, 10:06 AM
The Red Sox are the team that should be worried. There bullpen situation sucks at the moment and they really need to get it fixed.

nycsports2
04-12-2012, 10:24 AM
Of course the yankees are old, that's the risk you run with these lucrative contracts. But the money is slowly coming off the books and that's more $$ that can be spent on more big name FAs. There is a transitioning point coming up soon, but why worry? I don't think you fully comprehend how much money this organization has and is willing to spend. Also consider the young talent coming up.

The main slots to fill will be A-rod, Jeter, Rivera. If you are counting rentals/bench players, then you're not being reasonable because veteran backups are advantageous (Ibanez, Jones, Chavez)

As of right now, there is :

1) No immediate concern to move A-rod, he has a few more years before he'll need to be a DH, at that point there may be Wright up for grabs or another overrated 3B. Or maybe they'll give Laird a shot. Probably their toughest change.

2) Nunez will replace Jeter when he retires unless a trade is made for a shortstop.

3) Rafael Soriano/David Robertson to fill that role (NOT RIVERA, but then again no one is)... plus its not hard to replace closers, look at Boston this past offseason.

So an 0-3 start is a sign that A-rod, Jeter, and Rivera are washed up? I'm sorry but read a box score because Jeter is producing more than any other yankee hitter right now. A-rod's is "slumping" but has had decent plate appearances and fielding. Rivera blew one save and has been good in his other appearance. So you are either OVERREACTING or trying to get a rise out of yankee fans. Me, you won't get a rise out of me, I'm just going to tell you how it is.

And btw, your idea of "humor" is quite comical. You may not realize it, but your screenname says more about you than you realize. It reveals that you are basing your entire baseball premise on the yankees losing rather than your favorite team winning (whichever team it may be).

What does spending a billion dollars for 1 World Series have to do with an 0-3 start in 2012? Remember 2009? They had an 0-2 start... so i guess losing that one extra game means complete collapse? Your logic is comical. And btw, do you really think fans CARE that their organization had to spend more money to win? Most fans are PROUD their organization cares enough to reinvest their money for a future product and not settle with mediocrity.

i love when i buy a yankees fitted, jersey, etc... i know my moneys going to the right places and not the owners private jet... well most of it haha

back on topic not just bc im a yanks fan but i think if i HAD to choose 1 it would be the sox i just dont think they have it this yr and will miss the playoffs but thats just my opinion

Bo Sox Fan
04-12-2012, 11:02 AM
Our rotation is more than fine, Doubront was lights out all spring and in his first start... he was also the Sox minor league pitcher of the year in 2011, so the potential is endless with this kid.

Our bullpen for the moment is average only because it doesn't showcase any ''big names'' but Bard will be back in it by the end of the month when Dice-K returns to reassume the 5th spot in the rotation.

Don't forgot there's still 6 million of cap space from the Scataro trade to upgrade potential needs such as the bullpen. It's not like Cherrington's just gonna sit there and not do his job.

Matt Thornton has already been rumoured to be a trade option. Imagine him setting up Bard in 2 weeks? Things change fast in this game.

Mitchell133
04-12-2012, 01:28 PM
I'm not worried... do I think they'll win a championship in 2014-2017, I have no idea. I think they'll make the playoffs most years, especially with this new wild card system, making it that much easier to be in the final 5 of the AL.
Fair enough, but man a 35 year old Granderson, 36+ year old Teixeira, 38 year old ARod... Potential for some big time disaster, but I'll stop going off topic like you suggested.

Also, to the guy who suggested Doubront was "lights out", do you really expect to predict his season off of that start? Mr. 21 year old Alvarez dummied your lineup. Kyle Drabek was even more impressive than Doubront. Romero almost had a complete game 3 hitter, when he's been known for having a career 7+ ERA against the Red Sox. The red flags should be going off for BoSox fans in my opinion.

YEDN90
04-12-2012, 04:24 PM
You know who was NOT good this Spring? Raul Ibanez.

The same Ibanez that has had some big hits for us this year already.

Spring means NOTHING.

Bo Sox Fan
04-12-2012, 08:07 PM
Fair enough, but man a 35 year old Granderson, 36+ year old Teixeira, 38 year old ARod... Potential for some big time disaster, but I'll stop going off topic like you suggested.

Also, to the guy who suggested Doubront was "lights out", do you really expect to predict his season off of that start? Mr. 21 year old Alvarez dummied your lineup. Kyle Drabek was even more impressive than Doubront. Romero almost had a complete game 3 hitter, when he's been known for having a career 7+ ERA against the Red Sox. The red flags should be going off for BoSox fans in my opinion.

Yah I'm that guy but I don't understand what your saying?

Doubront was great in his first start but you don't give him the credit because he's a Red Sock... but then you say Alvarez and Drabek had good first starts as well but that will all of a sudden continue because they are Blue Jays and not Red Sox?

Do you not see the complete homerism in everything you say? It's absolutely gross.

Just sayin.

YEDN90
04-12-2012, 08:13 PM
Guess you missed the blatant point that one start means nothing.

Jeffy25
04-12-2012, 08:34 PM
Not going to argue with Jays fans anymore though since they haven't fielded a winning product in 20 years.


They haven't been under .500 since 09, and they won 85 games in 2010 the year they almost broke the home run record.

The Jays are a good organization that could have a better record than the Red Sox this season.

They are a pretty good team, and a fantastic organization.

sportscrazed
04-12-2012, 08:34 PM
Doubrant had a 4.22 ERA in AAA last year so to the Red Sox fan claiming he was godly last year you need to actually support it. Also, the kid does not have a great array of pitches and does not have a great plus pitch. He could be a solid 4th or 5th starter in his prime.

Bo Sox Fan
04-12-2012, 08:36 PM
From Red Sox standards, finishing 3rd is a failure.

From Blue Jays standards, finishing 3rd is a success.

That's the difference.

1903
04-12-2012, 08:42 PM
^ Exactly, but the same goes for Alvarez and Drabek, that's all I was getting at.

Not going to argue with Jays fans anymore though since they haven't fielded a winning product in 20 years.

It's like kids trying to tell there dad how to play baseball. One big LOL

By your logic Red Sox fans arguing with Yankees fans is like a minor league player trying to tell a big a big league player how to play ball. 27 to 7.

Bo Sox Fan
04-12-2012, 08:46 PM
By your logic Red Sox fans arguing with Yankees fans is like a minor league player trying to tell a big a big league player how to play ball. 27 to 7.

You are completely correct if your talking about 1930.

I guess you haven't seen the Sox record against your Yanks the past decade though. Please look into it... then you'll realize who's boss.

1903
04-12-2012, 08:52 PM
You are completely correct if your talking about 1930.

I guess you haven't seen the Sox record against your Yanks the past decade though. Please look into it... then you'll realize who's boss.

Like last season when that "boss" missed the postseason?

Bo Sox Fan
04-12-2012, 08:57 PM
Like when the Yanks annually get bounced out of the first round.

The highest payroll in sports goes a long way until you hit the post season don't it!!

2004 ALCS, no big deal.

1903
04-12-2012, 09:10 PM
Like when the Yanks annually get bounced out of the first round.

The highest payroll in sports goes a long way until you hit the post season don't it!!

2004 ALCS, no big deal.

That has nothing to do with my question. Last time I checked it was the Yankees who last won a WS. The Yankees that hold the advantage in the overall regular season play. The Yankees that hold the advantage in postseason play. The Yankees who have won more division titles. The Yankees who have won more pennants. The Yankees who have won more WS. Some Red Sox fans believe the last 8 years erase the previous 90+.

"Ace"ves
04-13-2012, 01:15 AM
You are completely correct if your talking about 1930.

I guess you haven't seen the Sox record against your Yanks the past decade though. Please look into it... then you'll realize who's boss.

Here we go again. You realize you have no argument right? I am not one to play the "rings" game cause I think its stupid, but if you bring it up, prepare to be burned.

Overall Yankees 27 Red Sox 7
In past 20 years Yankees 5 Red Sox 2
In past 10 years Yankees 1 Red Sox 2
In past 3 years Yankees 1 Red Sox 0
Last to win a WS Yankees

Just saying, if you play the "in the past ___ years", Red Sox only win if we are talking 8-11 years, tied in the past 5-7 years.

So you really only have one attack and that's 8-11 years span... where as Yankee fans have anything from 1930 to Now or

past
60,59,58,57,56,55,54,53,52,51,50,49,48,47,46,45,44 ,43,42,41,40,39,38,37,36,35,34,33,32,31,30,29,28,2 7,26,25,24,23,22,21,20,19,18,17,16,15,14,13,12,4,3
year span

Now listen, I give the Red Sox credit where its due and 2004 was the most amazing comeback Ive ever seen, no doubt about it. But don't come on here trying to down Blue Jay fans because their record doesn't indicate great success. If you play that game, then expect to be treated the same way in return. Normally I wouldn't be so cruel, but I read the nonsense you were writing and felt compelled to drop some logic. And if you want to talk collapses.... no i wont go there cause its too easy.

And I have to admit, I thought the Blue Jays were in a bad position last year... but their team looks really promising as of now. So let's just say they were a lot more talented than I originally gave them talent for... but I never bashed them like you did.

mtf
04-13-2012, 02:07 AM
From Red Sox standards, finishing 3rd is a failure.

From Blue Jays standards, finishing 3rd is a success.

That's the difference.

Finishing 3rd for the Red Sox is failure, you're right. With a payroll for major league talent of $175,249,119 it would be hard to see a 3rd place finish as anything else.

Finishing 3rd for the Blue Jays would not be a success, it would be progress. Anthopoulos took over the team just over 2 years ago, and the first move was to move out Halladay and start a complete rebuild from the ground up. It doesn't happen over night but anyone who is paying attention can see obvious signs that the team will contend. That may not happen this year, but there's every indication that it will be in the not too distant future.

As a bitter person who wants to throw insults around, all you can do is point to the past, not the present or the future.

YEDN90
04-13-2012, 10:15 AM
Do not give logic to Bo Sox Fan, because it'll be a waste of time.

The Sox had a good few years, thats it.

Teams really cannot be compared throughout the majority of history.

Mitchell133
04-13-2012, 02:12 PM
Finishing 3rd for the Red Sox is failure, you're right. With a payroll for major league talent of $175,249,119 it would be hard to see a 3rd place finish as anything else.

Finishing 3rd for the Blue Jays would not be a success, it would be progress. Anthopoulos took over the team just over 2 years ago, and the first move was to move out Halladay and start a complete rebuild from the ground up. It doesn't happen over night but anyone who is paying attention can see obvious signs that the team will contend. That may not happen this year, but there's every indication that it will be in the not too distant future.

As a bitter person who wants to throw insults around, all you can do is point to the past, not the present or the future.

Exactly. I think the Bo Sox finishing third is a lot to ask for going forward. Jays are not pretenders.

Pinstripe pride
04-13-2012, 02:14 PM
Like when the Yanks annually get bounced out of the first round.

The highest payroll in sports goes a long way until you hit the post season don't it!!

2004 ALCS, no big deal.

consideirng they've won a world sereis since then, i doubt people care all that much

Pinstripe pride
04-13-2012, 02:16 PM
Exactly. I think the Bo Sox finishing third is a lot to ask for going forward. Jays are not pretenders.

depends what you are referncing. i dont see them as a real wordl series conteder this yea,r but they will ceritanly be a playoff contender

Mitchell133
04-13-2012, 02:19 PM
depends what you are referncing. i dont see them as a real wordl series conteder this yea,r but they will ceritanly be a playoff contender

I don't know if the Jays winning a world series will ever be realistic. I mean contender as in Boston has no right to just assume they'll finish 4th. This rotation is among the youngest with arguably the highest velocity in the AL. The pen is as good as it's been in a while and the lineup speaks for itself.

oak2455
04-13-2012, 02:23 PM
Toronto has some really good young kids.......they look promising

Pinstripe pride
04-13-2012, 02:28 PM
I don't know if the Jays winning a world series will ever be realistic. I mean contender as in Boston has no right to just assume they'll finish 4th. This rotation is among the youngest with arguably the highest velocity in the AL. The pen is as good as it's been in a while and the lineup speaks for itself.

i dont know. they could be scary in a few years. they have a lot of young talent