Re: Who will win the NL East
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
Let's hope it stays that way, for the Dodgers' sake.
Amen.
Quote:
I can deny it...:p The Yankees have been doing it, but I'm more inclined to believe that that's because...well...the Yankees are good...and that it had little to do with Torre.
This Yankees season could speak something to Torre vs. no Torre. But yeah, it has little to do with Torre, though he's got the experience, which means he knows how and what to change when a team needs that extra boost to close the gap. It was much easier before, when you didn't have to worry about the health of your closer, or who was playing SS. I think his approach to the Dodgers outfield will be similar to his approach to the Yankees' rotation problems from the past few years.
Quote:
Speaking purely offensively, I don't see how Manny is "easily better" than Quentin, Swisher, Dye, Braun, Cameron, Hart, Bay, Ellsbury, AND Drew. I'd say he's better than Swisher, Hart Cameron, Ellsbury, and Drew. Manny, at his peak, would be easily better, but, that's not Manny anymore.
I don't know... he's not at his peak, that's for sure, but he's still Manny, and the Dodgers seem to have given him a rebirth. For one thing, he's certainly playing harder, and it looks like he's having fun for the first time in a while. I also think there's something to be said about stretch and playoff experience, and there's no doubt Manny beats everyone hands down (save maybe Dye) in that department.
Quote:
Jason Bay and Jermaine Dye are similar to Manny, but I'd put Manny above them as well, although it's close. That leaves Quentin and Braun. I'd take Braun over Manny, and I'd say Quentin and Manny are a wash.
If I absolutely had to go with just one, it'd be hard not to take Manny if I'm thinking playoffs. But Braun is great, and wow, Q has had one hell of a season so far... what a pickup he was. I caught him at the Cell a few times early in the season when he, AJ and Dye were the only ones on the team hitting. The Sox fans really love him, and for good reason.
Quote:
Going with the Manny-Kemp-Ethier outfield and including defense....Quentin's better than Manny. Manny is a very poor defender.. Kemp's better than Swisher/Griffey, but Dye is much better than Ethier. All told, close, but I'd take Chicago slightly over LA.
Swisher is so slow and sometimes inept that his own fans heckle his defense... I would like to see him move to 1B permanently. He's really great there, but not so great in the outfield. I don't think Dye is "much better" than Ethier. Better offensively no doubt, but Either's much better defensively. He also fits the lineup well, and is a different type of player, so it's hard to compare. He's not putting up the numbers that Dye is, so Dye is inherently better offensively, but overall, not a HUGE amount. Manny is pretty bad at defense, but he is trying harder now than he did with the Sox, and I don't think Torre is going to put up with his defensive antics. The first time he stumbles and falls on top of the ball and giggles, he's going to be pulled for Pierre.
And actually, some of the antics have been sweet plays. High-fiving a fan and THEN throwing a runner out? Not bad...
Don't forget that there's an incredible defensive outfielder for the Dodgers off the bench, either... in fact, simply having Pierre and Jones on the bench DOES add a third topic that could be discussed, and that's depth. I'd have to say the Sox become better if you did that, thanks to Griffey (because he still plays baseball and Jones doesn't), but Juan Pierre and Andruw Jones off the bench? I don't care how lousy they're playing this season, that's a pretty wicked bench. Pierre as a fourth outfielder and Jones as a late inning defensive replacement... these are luxuries which shouldn't be overlooked.
Quote:
With Milwaukee, it's a similar story. Braun and Manny are close offensively, but again, Manny's defense pushes him below Braun in my eyes... Kemp is better than Cameron, and Hart's better than Ethier.
Again, with a Manny who is trying, and with the depth... I think the Dodgers get an edge over the Brewers.
Re: Who will win the NL East
Quote:
Originally Posted by
justanewguy
Probably the Mets, they're just too good... possibly the best team in the Majors on paper. But they have a hard time winning consistently.
ur a funny guy lol.. before atl traded texeria they had a better team on paper and they were FAR from in ellite team.. i had the mets hovering around 83-87 wins and in 3rd behind ATL and then philly both at about 90-92 wins. I guess I was wrong about ATL and FLA. NY is lucky to be where they are. Santana was expected to be the reason they were going to make it...
I say he is the reason they are NOT since they have NOTHING to go trading with
Re: Who will win the NL East
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Überpöster
ur a funny guy lol.. before atl traded texeria they had a better team on paper and they were FAR from in ellite team..
Atlanta!??!?
And *I* am the funny one?? :)
Re: Who will win the NL East
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Überpöster
ur a funny guy lol.. before atl traded texeria they had a better team on paper and they were FAR from in ellite team.. i had the mets hovering around 83-87 wins and in 3rd behind ATL and then philly both at about 90-92 wins. I guess I was wrong about ATL and FLA. NY is lucky to be where they are. Santana was expected to be the reason they were going to make it...
I say he is the reason they are NOT since they have NOTHING to go trading with
Santana is not the reason they're not going to make it (if they don't make it). Santana has done nothing but pitch exceptionally well. The bullpen has blown 6 wins for him. He'd have 15 wins right now and nobody would be saying a word about him if it wasn't for the bullpen. But, the bullpen sucks, so, that obviously means Santana sucks.
The Mets are a better team than Atlanta on paper, even with Teixeira. Atlanta was banking on an even riskier pitching staff than the Mets, and the Mets offense is better than Atlanta.
Re: Who will win the NL East
no way was the mets staff betther than atlanta on paper at the begining. santana and Maine were the only definate "studs" Match up well with hudson and smoltz with slight edge to smoltz (obviously looking back it now would go to maine but before the season...
glavine is better than perez. hampton was not even really an option and as a #4 ill take my chance. both teams had no #4 or #5 tho I thought of jurgens as a #4 and I think he will be better than pelfre
Re: Who will win the NL East
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TheNamelessPoet
no way was the mets staff betther than atlanta on paper at the begining. santana and Maine were the only definate "studs" Match up well with hudson and smoltz with slight edge to smoltz (obviously looking back it now would go to maine but before the season...
glavine is better than perez. hampton was not even really an option and as a #4 ill take my chance. both teams had no #4 or #5 tho I thought of jurgens as a #4 and I think he will be better than pelfre
Who's Jurgens?
Hudson matches up well with Santana?
Are you crazy??
No need to be a homer now, your team's out of contention. :)
HGM's right, the Braves were banking on a very risky staff, and are lucky it didn't turn out even worse, since the young guys pitched very well.
Re: Who will win the NL East
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TheNamelessPoet
no way was the mets staff betther than atlanta on paper at the begining. santana and Maine were the only definate "studs" Match up well with hudson and smoltz with slight edge to smoltz (obviously looking back it now would go to maine but before the season...
glavine is better than perez. hampton was not even really an option and as a #4 ill take my chance. both teams had no #4 or #5 tho I thought of jurgens as a #4 and I think he will be better than pelfre
Santana is MUCH better than Hudson. Hudson, really, was the only definite in the Braves rotation, and he's succumbed to Tommy John surgery, although that couldn't have been foreseen. Smoltz is better than Maine, yes, but, as with any old pitcher, he comes with an injury risk. Accounting for that, I'd say Smoltz is still slightly better than Maine, but not by the same margin as Santana over Hudson, which means Santana/Maine > Hudson/Smoltz.
Next, Glavine better than Perez? Even ignoring the injury concerns that come with old pitchers, as I mentioned above, I do not see how this is at all plausible. Glavine was slightly below league average last season, and obviously on the decline. His strikeout rate plummeted. Perez has always had great stuff, but has been inconsistent. Last year, he was very good. This year, he's been worse, and very inconsistent, but overall, slightly above average. Glavine has worsened from where he was last year, along with being injured. Perez > Glavine.
Entering the season, similar seasons were expected from both Jurrjens and Pelfrey, so that's a wash.
