DonkSlayer 1 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 Pick one. I picked them mostly by record but that's pretty superficial. Link to post Share on other sites
greatwhite 0 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 I know you put other there, but how could you not include the teams leading the pack in this poll? No A's, Red Sox, White Sox, or Tigers. Personally, I think it will be the Red Sox. Link to post Share on other sites
wsox8 10 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 Minnesota because they are better than the Yanks. yes I said it. Link to post Share on other sites
DonkSlayer 1 Posted July 18, 2006 Author Share Posted July 18, 2006 Minnesota because they are better than the Yanks. yes I said it.I started this thread because I noticed that the Twins would be 3 games ahead in the AL West and they very likely won't make the playoffs this year. Link to post Share on other sites
MDXS 0 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 I know you put other there, but how could you not include the teams leading the pack in this poll? No A's, Red Sox, White Sox, or Tigers. Personally, I think it will be the Red Sox.Indeed. It's very possible that 2 of those teams listed won't make the playoffs. Link to post Share on other sites
76clubs 0 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 Indeed. It's very possible that 2 of those teams listed won't make the playoffs.ya Link to post Share on other sites
doublemeup 0 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 I know you put other there, but how could you not include the teams leading the pack in this poll? No A's, Red Sox, White Sox, or Tigers.Gotta include those teams. Link to post Share on other sites
TB17 0 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 I wanna know why everyone thinks chicago/detroit are both locks. They're only 2.5 games on the wildcard. Link to post Share on other sites
aadams_22 3 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 I don't see Minnesota holding on, although I would like to. Link to post Share on other sites
MDXS 0 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 I wanna know why everyone thinks chicago/detroit are both locks. They're only 2.5 games on the wildcard.The Tigers are the closest thing the AL has to a lock, but you're right in that the White Sox are pretty vulnerable. It doesn't help that they have perhaps the toughest schedule the rest of the way. Link to post Share on other sites
TB17 0 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 7 games isnt even a lock. Everyone just loves to assume that there's gonna be 2 teams fromt he AL central this year, and it might not evne happen. It's only July. Link to post Share on other sites
KowboyKoop 0 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Are people here complaining that there is a AL Central "bias" or something?? Isn't it usually the other way around..lol. Whatever. Link to post Share on other sites
wsox8 10 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Are people here complaining that there is a AL Central "bias" or something?? Isn't it usually the other way around..lol. Whatever.Obviously there is.. The Royals are so overrated... Link to post Share on other sites
DonkSlayer 1 Posted July 19, 2006 Author Share Posted July 19, 2006 I think it's sensibility to support the AL central, really. 3 teams that may be winning their divisions if they weren't together all in the same one. Poor Royals. Tough to team-build in that environment. They need to move to the AL west for a few years.All you hear about is "Will those AL central teams lose their consistency?" As a Red Sox fan, I can say firsthand that if any teams roller-coaster, it's about every one in the AL East. The WSox won it last year being consistent, and the Tigers look like that this year too. Don't know who's gonna come out on top in the Central, but you can't bet against the ALCS being Detroit-Chicago. Link to post Share on other sites
wsox8 10 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I think it's sensibility to support the AL central, really. 3 teams that may be winning their divisions if they weren't together all in the same one. Poor Royals. Tough to team-build in that environment. They need to move to the AL west for a few years.All you hear about is "Will those AL central teams lose their consistency?" As a Red Sox fan, I can say firsthand that if any teams roller-coaster, it's about every one in the AL East. The WSox won it last year being consistent, and the Tigers look like that this year too. Don't know who's gonna come out on top in the Central, but you can't bet against the ALCS being Detroit-Chicago. I think I could definitely be wrong but I can see Detroit actually failing to make the playoffs and having the one of the AL East teams slipping in. Detroit still is not used to playing for a playoff spot this late in the year and so many things could go wrong. But you never know. I have been wrong before. Link to post Share on other sites
MDXS 0 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Don't know who's gonna come out on top in the Central, but you can't bet against the ALCS being Detroit-Chicago.I wouldn't bet against Detroit making the playoffs at this point, but I wouldn't be nearly as confident about them making the ALCS.vs.Boston 1-2New York 1-3CWS 1-6Oakland 3-3They can't play the White Sox in the first round, but it helps in showing that they've struggled against the best teams. This is before Rogers hits his second half slump and Verlander crashes from never having thrown this many innings before. Link to post Share on other sites
DonkSlayer 1 Posted July 19, 2006 Author Share Posted July 19, 2006 I wouldn't bet against Detroit making the playoffs at this point, but I wouldn't be nearly as confident about them making the ALCS.vs.Boston 1-2New York 1-3CWS 1-6Oakland 3-3They can't play the White Sox in the first round, but it helps in showing that they've struggled against the best teams. This is before Rogers hits his second half slump and Verlander crashes from never having thrown this many innings before.Yeah but can you really bet on one of those teams (not the CWS) BEATING them either? I think it's even money. You're basing your assumption on something that hasn't happened yet. I can see your point if we were in the midst of a Tiger slump. Link to post Share on other sites
MDXS 0 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Yeah but can you really bet on one of those teams (not the CWS) BEATING them either? I think it's even money. You're basing your assumption on something that hasn't happened yet. I can see your point if we were in the midst of a Tiger slump.I'd take Boston over the Tigers in the playoffs any day....with or without a Rogers and Verlander collapse. My opinion's the same either way. Those records against the better teams have happened with Rogers and Verlander pitching well. Link to post Share on other sites
TB17 0 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Are people here complaining that there is a AL Central "bias" or something?? Isn't it usually the other way around..lol. Whatever.No bias, just a lot of people are assuming (or are really happy) about how only one team is gonna make it from the east. Especially when the wildcard isnt more than 3 games apart.Of course everyone said the same when Cleveland was real close to the playoffs. Link to post Share on other sites
DonkSlayer 1 Posted July 20, 2006 Author Share Posted July 20, 2006 I'd take Boston over the Tigers in the playoffs any day....with or without a Rogers and Verlander collapse. My opinion's the same either way. Those records against the better teams have happened with Rogers and Verlander pitching well.If both teams just started up this year and had no history whatsoever, would you feel the same way? Link to post Share on other sites
MDXS 0 Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 If both teams just started up this year and had no history whatsoever, would you feel the same way?Probably not as much, but why eliminate factors that would help make a better decision? For instance, Kenny Rogers' ERA jumps by a run after the All-Star break the past few years. I'd interpret that as a sign of wearing down. Considering that he's 41, I feel as if that will happen again. He's just one pitcher in a staff that has questions directly relating to innings thrown. The Red Sox team plays in a playoff atmosphere whenever they are home (especially when the Yankees are in town), have to deal with the pressure of an overbearing media every day, (and where my point gets relevant) have much more recent playoff experience than the Tigers players including a World Series win for some of them. A team like that will have an edge come playoffs. When it comes down to it, I'd rather face the Tigers than the White Sox at this point. Link to post Share on other sites
DonkSlayer 1 Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 Probably not as much, but why eliminate factors that would help make a better decision? For instance, Kenny Rogers' ERA jumps by a run after the All-Star break the past few years. I'd interpret that as a sign of wearing down. Considering that he's 41, I feel as if that will happen again. He's just one pitcher in a staff that has questions directly relating to innings thrown. The Red Sox team plays in a playoff atmosphere whenever they are home (especially when the Yankees are in town), have to deal with the pressure of an overbearing media every day, (and where my point gets relevant) have much more recent playoff experience than the Tigers players including a World Series win for some of them. A team like that will have an edge come playoffs. When it comes down to it, I'd rather face the Tigers than the White Sox at this point.The White Sox are in a bit o' a slump rih now, eh? Link to post Share on other sites
MDXS 0 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 The White Sox are in a bit o' a slump rih now, eh?True, though it doesn't change my stance yet. Interestingly, The White Sox are now less likely to make the playoffs than both the Red Sox and the Yankees according to BP. Link to post Share on other sites
wsox8 10 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 True, though it doesn't change my stance yet. Interestingly, The White Sox are now less likely to make the playoffs than both the Red Sox and the Yankees according to BP.BP is the best thing that has happened since the invention of the toilet. Link to post Share on other sites
bascomeb 0 Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 It's ashame that the twins wont make the playoffs with Liriano and Santana. They would be sick in a playoff series Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now