innersanctum Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(heirdog @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 09:33 AM) Are you sure about that? If the Sox played in the NL, Thome would not be a factor (and if he played, then Konerko wouldn't). The fact is the Mets look damn good and are on par with the Sox and Tigers right now and the rankings reflect that. But if the Sox were a National League team they wouldn't have acquired Thome. They would have gotten a stronger arm in the bullpen, me thinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heirdog Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 12:30 PM) You also have to remember that the team would likely be built differently as well. We didn't have Thome last year did we? No, we had Everett and Thomas at DH which is hardly anything that I'd be upset about losing. The fact of the matter is, this pitching staff from top to bottom would absolutely dominate in the National League, there isn't a single staff in the NL that even comes close to the Sox and however the batting order would look, probably with Rowand in CF and Gio/Haigwood in the minors, I am certain this team would absolutely wreck in the NL. If we add caveats and hypothetical scenarios, then there is no point in discussing because anyone can make a scenario fit their argument. I am not talking about last year's team or a team that would have been built differently. The team as it stands today is who I am comparing. The pitching staff edge may go to the Sox over the Mets but a staff led by Pedro and Glavine (how he is pitching this year) and closed by Wagner is no slouch. The hitting edge has to go to the Mets since either Konerko or Thome would have to sit out for us in the NL. If the Mets were in the AL, they could get Milledge or Nady in addition to their thumpers. Bottom line, I think the Sox are the better team because I am biased but you can't say the rankings are way off. As far as last year's team, they dominated the NL in the world series but when you look back you realize they swept a team by winning a nail-biter in game 1, a walk-off 9th inning in game 2, a 14-inning marathon in game 3 and 1-0 game in the clincher. So it was pretty damn close...for a sweep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 12:49 AM) Why the Tigers are not number 1 just boggles the mind... I think they gave it to us based on head to head competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 All of these "Power Rankings" are not cumulative. They are based on record + what they did the past week. The Mets absolutely raked, but overall, are they the best team? Last week they were...but if you include the whole season, head-to-head records, etc., I think you have the White Sox on top still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoctor Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 this blurb really surprised me: With 15 homers through 65 games, Justin Morneau is on pace to have the Twins' first 30-HR season since 1987. that's an interesting stat. i would not have guessed that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(thedoctor @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 03:51 PM) this blurb really surprised me: that's an interesting stat. i would not have guessed that. Yup. Back in the 90's when Ron Coomer was their best player, he would lead the team in HR's with like 16. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&T Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(thedoctor @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 03:51 PM) this blurb really surprised me: that's an interesting stat. i would not have guessed that. And that's with David Ortiz being on some of those teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoctor Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 08:52 PM) Yup. Back in the 90's when Ron Coomer was their best player, he would lead the team in HR's with like 16. i just think that considering the era we just went through, to go almost 20 years without a player have 30-plus homers is a statistical anomaly of some sort. add in how good the twins have been for much of that time, and it gets even weirder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balance Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 (edited) Were those power rankings released today? After the vaunted Mets dropped 2 of 3 games to the 4th place team in the AL East? If so, what a joke. Edited June 20, 2006 by Balance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamrock4Life Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 i think they were released today but are put together and compiled on friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted June 19, 2006 Share Posted June 19, 2006 QUOTE(WCSox @ Jun 19, 2006 -> 12:42 PM) Garland and Garcia would've had trouble dominating a AAA team with the way they've been pitching so far. Agreed that, overall, Sox pitching would fare better in the NL, but the back of the rotation would still get hit. Both of their eras would be atleast a full run lower in the NL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.