Hey Ken Rosenfraud! How does that crow taste?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet

colorado peaked at the right time last year didnt they... and won the NL pennant... does that mean they were the best team in the NL... if you say yes ill send the guys in the white coats because you are nuts

---

Technically, yes. They represented the NL. Were they the best all year long? No, the Cubs were much better than the Rockies were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

No, I dont care who wins the series. I do not like or dislike either team. I am, however, realistic. The Phillies were not even the best team in the National League, which is much inferior to the American League. Thats a fact, like it or not.

And yes, the goal is to be playing good ball in October. I dont blame you, a Philadelphia fan for gushing over the Phils recent success. Much like Didger fans did a couple of weeks ago, before the clock struck midnight and they turned into pumpkins again.

Enjoy your teams good fortune. The team I root for has won 2 of the past 4 world series and, believe me, I celebrated each one. The simple truth is that the best team in baseball rarely wins the World Series anymore. I would submit that, in this century, it has happened only once. And it looks like it wont be happening again this year.

---

Well, like I said before, if a team plays well enough to be in the hunt for the playoffs and peak at the right time, that IS ALL THAT MATTERS! You do not have to win 162 + games to win the World Series.

Obviously not. Stating the obvious...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

Obviously not. Stating the obvious...

---

Oh, and I must agree, when Boston won in 2004, they were the best team in baseball that year.

I dont think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

I dont think so.

---

???
than who???

Then what year do you consider them best team winning?

AS Poet stated, the Red Sox in 2007. Other than last year, I dont see how anyone who looks objectively can make a case that the best team has won in any other year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

AS Poet stated, the Red Sox in 2007. Other than last year, I dont see how anyone who looks objectively can make a case that the best team has won in any other year.

---

That is a matter of opinion.

I think they had better players in 2004.

The Cardinals were baseballs best team in 2004. They just picked a bad time to stop playing well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

No, I dont care who wins the series. I do not like or dislike either team. I am, however, realistic. The Phillies were not even the best team in the National League, which is much inferior to the American League. Thats a fact, like it or not.

---

Fact? No. It is like comparing apples to oranges. Both are a part of the fruit family, but they are vastly different! You cannot compare the AL to the NL because of the designated hitter. The designated hitter is a farce and a tragedy to the true concept of baseball. Playing in the NL requires strategy to use pinch hitters for your pitchers, knowing who is coming up in the next inning and who you want throwing, etc...

There are A LOT of variables that have to be considered when playing in the National League. No so much in the American League. Sure, there are other things to consider, but managers do not have to worry about the pitchers batting hurting their teams chances of scoring a run.

The National League is the superior league in terms of strategy. The American League is the superior league in terms of offense.

The American League is superior in the terms of beating the living crap out of the National League in head to head competition. The DH has absolutely nothing to do with anything. If you like the DH, or hate it....doesnt matter at all. There is more strategy without the DH, no doubt. Thats irrelevant to the discussion, however.

It is a fact. The AL is not only better, its much better than the NL. At least for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phightinphils

That is a matter of opinion.

I think they had better players in 2004.

---

better players does not ALWAYS mean best TEAM... a few years after 2000 The Yankees had the best colletion pg stars... doesnt mean they had the best team... certainly does not hurt but its not always the key

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

The American League is superior in the terms of beating the living crap out of the National League in head to head competition. The DH has absolutely nothing to do with anything. If you like the DH, or hate it....doesnt matter at all. There is more strategy without the DH, no doubt. Thats irrelevant to the discussion, however.

It is a fact. The AL is not only better, its much better than the NL. At least for now.

---

Irrelevant to the discussion? It is RELEVANT! The DH has everything to do with it. Sign a great hitter and let him bat for your pitcher instead? Sure it makes sense, but it is not the true game of baseball.

It is not a fact. The only thing that is a fact is the AL is losing to the NL because the NL team is beating the living crap out of the AL team in thead to head competition and beating the crap out of the ball!

HUH? Whats the chance of getting that last sentence in plain english?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swampdog

HUH? Whats the chance of getting that last sentence in plain english?

---

What are you talking about? It reads fine to me. I am re-itterating what you said, but in the factual terms.