Yankees haven't overtaken BoSox, Rays

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8...-Rays?MSNHPHMA

Houston just said basically what this guy did earlier, they have a poor defense that isnt getting any better.

The only answer I can honestly give is "it remains to be seen." As I stated elsewhere, I've yet to dig deep into the 3 top AL East teams, but off the top of my head, I'd still probably rate the Yankees 3rd behind Boston and Tampa, although I don't know in which order I'd rank those two.

I refuse to take part in polls with bad grammar.

haha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

The only answer I can honestly give is "it remains to be seen." As I stated elsewhere, I've yet to dig deep into the 3 top AL East teams, but off the top of my head, I'd still probably rate the Yankees 3rd behind Boston and Tampa, although I don't know in which order I'd rank those two.

---

yeah...who knows...if the Yanks dont get Manny or Teix, I have to say no.

Anything can happen but if I were made to bet I'd bet on the Rays repeating.

They haven't overtaken them.

Honestly, the thing that really grabs me about the Yankees is the way that they're trying to win a championship (spending boatloads of money) when they're essentially one of the teams that PROVED that throwing exorbitant amounts of money at superstars is not the way to win (by doing so and not winning). History does tend to repeat itself, and I believe it will again with the Yankees.

I'm saying remains to be seen but yes, like Houston, off the top of my head I would still put the Rays and Sox ahead of the Yanks.

The Rays are the best team in that division. That rotation is killer...way better then the Yanks even with CC and Burnett.

I think that we need to add another bat to go along with A-Rod.

i hate to say it but it remails to be seen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet

i hate to say it but it remails to be seen

---

Remails to be seen? Were they sending postage? :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by koolzach1

i think that we need to add another bat to go along with a-rod.

---

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...................

Red Sox are DEFINETLY not ahead of the Yankees with the Mark Teixeira signing. Only Red Sox homers could think that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by defense

Red Sox are DEFINETLY not ahead of the Yankees with the Mark Teixeira signing. Only Red Sox homers could think that

---

100% agree!

It just got a whole lot messier with the Yankees signing Tex.

You know, I wouldn't be at all surprised if these three teams EACH challenge the 95 win mark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

It just got a whole lot messier with the Yankees signing Tex.

You know, I wouldn't be at all surprised if these three teams EACH challenge the 95 win mark.

---

Agreed. The AL East will be the most fun division in baseball's history of divisions in 2009!

Poor, Poor Orioles...

the guys on Mike and Mike in the morning this morning were proclaiming the Yankees the team to beat now lol

I forget who it was, but SportsCenter last night ranked the Red Sox #1, the Rays #2 and the Yankees #3. And this is AFTER the Teixeira signing.

Call me crazy but I don't see it. Right now, on paper, I would put the Red Sox in third. The Rays were better than the Sox last year. The Rays are young and getting better (David Price anyone?). The Sox are old and getting older (Varitek, Lowell, Ortiz, Drew) and they are without all the Hall-Of-Famers that were on the 2004 team (Manny, Pedro and Schilling).

[I actually wouldn't vote for Curt for the Hall, but I think he's going to make it eventually]

If it was a fat man with messy hair, it was probably John Kruk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clay Dreslough

I forget who it was, but SportsCenter last night ranked the Red Sox #1, the Rays #2 and the Yankees #3. And this is AFTER the Teixeira signing.

Call me crazy but I don't see it. Right now, on paper, I would put the Red Sox in third. The Rays were better than the Sox last year. The Rays are young and getting better (David Price anyone?). The Sox are old and getting older (Varitek, Lowell, Ortiz, Drew) and they are without all the Hall-Of-Famers that were on the 2004 team (Manny, Pedro and Schilling).

[I actually wouldn't vote for Curt for the Hall, but I think he's going to make it eventually]

---

I have to see the Rays do it again....call me a pessimist, i think they'll be good but I don't think they were the best team in the division last year and I don't see it this year either. They played the best over the season, and deserve all the credit....but lets see the encore.

Joe Sheehan remarked how he sees the Rays as a clear 3rd in the division right now, for what it's worth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

I have to see the Rays do it again....call me a pessimist, i think they'll be good but I don't think they were the best team in the division last year and I don't see it this year either. They played the best over the season, and deserve all the credit....but lets see the encore.

---

wow. that makes tons of sense ..... :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rogue9

wow. that makes tons of sense ..... :confused:

---

It does. They played the best in terms of wins and losses, but the Red Sox were likely a better team, as underlying indicators like runs scored and runs allowed show.

To use one extreme example, the Angels had the best record in the majors. They "played the best" over the season. However, they were FAR from the best team in the majors. They benefitted from a good deal of luck, and also benefitted from being able to feast on three relatively poor teams, while the Rays and Red Sox play in the AL East, where 4 teams are legitimate playoff contenders (Yes, the Jays in 2008 were an excellent team and likely would've been in the playoffs if they played in any other division).

It will be a very nice race next year, but I usually go with what players say. They are the best until you beat them. Thats why I pick the Rays and Phils in their respective divisions. Tampa proved they were the best in the AL last year and will be until the teams prove different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

To use one extreme example, the Angels had the best record in the majors. They "played the best" over the season. However, they were FAR from the best team in the majors. They benefitted from a good deal of luck, and also benefitted from being able to feast on three relatively poor teams, while the Rays and Red Sox play in the AL East, where 4 teams are legitimate playoff contenders (Yes, the Jays in 2008 were an excellent team and likely would've been in the playoffs if they played in any other division).

---

Exactly, imagine how good the Red Sox would be if they played the AL West teams last season, or how much worse the Angels would have been if they were in the AL East.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

It does. They played the best in terms of wins and losses, but the Red Sox were likely a better team, as underlying indicators like runs scored and runs allowed show.

To use one extreme example, the Angels had the best record in the majors. They "played the best" over the season. However, they were FAR from the best team in the majors. They benefitted from a good deal of luck, and also benefitted from being able to feast on three relatively poor teams, while the Rays and Red Sox play in the AL East, where 4 teams are legitimate playoff contenders (Yes, the Jays in 2008 were an excellent team and likely would've been in the playoffs if they played in any other division).

---

wait a minute but doesn't the fact that they rays won in the toughest division legitimize their record and accomplishments? afterall they had a winning record against those same sox over the year and had to play the same division talent as the sox and came out better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wassit3

wait a minute but doesn't the fact that they rays won in the toughest division legitimize their record and accomplishments? afterall they had a winning record against those same sox over the year and had to play the same division talent as the sox and came out better.

---

It legitimizes them as an excellent team. It doesn't mean that they were the better team than the Red Sox. Their record vs. them comes with the caveat of being a small sample size. They only had a 2 game lead over the Red Sox overall, which is well within the margin of error. The Red Sox outscored opponents by 151 runs, 103 for Tampa Bay. (Toronto, by the way, was at +104).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

It legitimizes them as an excellent team. It doesn't mean that they were the better team than the Red Sox. Their record vs. them comes with the caveat of being a small sample size. They only had a 2 game lead over the Red Sox overall, which is well within the margin of error. The Red Sox outscored opponents by 151 runs, 103 for Tampa Bay. (Toronto, by the way, was at +104).

---

which is why I say using how many runs a team out scored opponents by is an incomplete way to rate teams, the blue jays were plus 104 and finished 4th! Here is an extreme example, say teams A, B, and C are all in the same division and they are basically .500 against each other even. However Team C has a much weaker out of division schedule and murders teams from the weaker divisions, teams A and B both have tougher out of division schedules and will they also dominate their out of division games they do not out score them by nearly as much. How do you tell fairly which of those teams is the best? I would rather look at how much the rays and sox out scored the teams in their division by and the differential between their common opponents outside the division in addition to overall run differential...

Obviously it's just one piece of evidence.