Agreed...imagine how good they would be with Alex Rodriguez in their line up.ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:This team was picked to finish last in their division by most baseball "insiders" and is holding their own without the best player in baseball
Royals vs. Deadbirds
Moderator: Cueball
-
RevLimiter
- Count Chunkula
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:15 pm
- Location: Heartland Of America
Re: Royals vs. Deadbirds
T1B- THE place to be for fun, informative sports talk....or NOT:
Wet-Brained Fucktard wrote:I know we here like to talk shit and we do tend to get, how you say, immature at times. At some points, the banter on a board like this can be somewhat childish. It happens.
-
RevLimiter
- Count Chunkula
- Posts: 2211
- Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:15 pm
- Location: Heartland Of America
Re: Royals vs. Deadbirds
....and the Royals continue to whip dat Tardinal ASS. :twisted:
T1B- THE place to be for fun, informative sports talk....or NOT:
Wet-Brained Fucktard wrote:I know we here like to talk shit and we do tend to get, how you say, immature at times. At some points, the banter on a board like this can be somewhat childish. It happens.
Re: Royals vs. Deadbirds
Rough night for the NL overall...every AL team except the Blue Jays, Orioles and Angels won. The Yanks and Mets split their unusual doubleheader of course but everyone else was victorious including the entire AL Central.
8 AL teams now have double-digit wins against the NL while they have no team with more than 8 wins in interleague play. The funny thing is that I think NL will kick the AL's ass in the All-Star Game...more individually talented players this year in the NL but the better teams are in the AL.
8 AL teams now have double-digit wins against the NL while they have no team with more than 8 wins in interleague play. The funny thing is that I think NL will kick the AL's ass in the All-Star Game...more individually talented players this year in the NL but the better teams are in the AL.
Re: Royals vs. Deadbirds
Dinsdale wrote:The Royals now play in the SEC?
Who knew?
Speaking in terms of this past year in college football:
The White Sox would be LSU...lead by an eccentric coach/manager and recently won a championship. They look like they're back to being a contender after an off year the year before.
The Twins would be Tennessee...a steady team/program that continues to win but you don't know how or why because they don't look all that impressive on paper.
The Tigers would be Georgia...started off the year kinda slow but is picking up steam as the season rolls on and is one of the better teams out there at the moment.
The Indians would be Florida...a team with great success last year but is struggling quite a bit and aren't living up to expectations.
The Royals would be Kentucky or Arkansas...a good offense but not an overall great team. Very capable of knocking off top teams but can all go through stretches of ineptitute.
-
TheJON
- Iowa State Grad
- Posts: 4546
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:11 pm
- Location: Kinnick Stadium by day, Kauffman Stadium by night
Re: Royals vs. Deadbirds
I agree with your SEC analogy, Shoalzie except for the White Sox. Wouldn't compare the White Sox to LSU. More like Auburn.
The AL Central is en fuego! Twins and Royals are both winners of 11 of 12 and the Tigers are tearing it up as well and the White Sox have been steady.
13-3 for KC and Minnesota vs the NL. AL has won 60% of the interleague games, which I believe is the highest percentage they've ever won vs the NL. I remember at the beginning of the year a lot of people thought the NL had made up ground on the AL but that's been proven false.
One thing I notice from the NL is it's not that they don't have just about as many superstar players as the AL but the back end of the rotation, the teams defenses, and the bullpens just don't match up.
I'd consider the Royals bullpen overall maybe 4th or 5th best in the AL but I would take it up against ANY NL bullpen. I also think the Royals defensively are middle of the pack in the AL (although I believe we're in the top 2 in fielding %), but we'd be in the top 2-3 of the NL easily.
The Cardinals would not win more than 70 games in the AL. No way, no how. There's a reason they pick up bums that couldn't hack it in the AL and then go on to play for LaRussa and have good years in St. Louis. It's because the NL just isn't very good. Look at Chris Carpenter. Bum in Toronto turned Cy Young winner in STL, although I'd venture to guess steroids played a big role in that. Todd Wellemeyer? He was the worst pitcher I've ever seen in KC and that says a lot. Joel Pineiro? Dude was a piece of crap in Seattle. Isringhausen was pretty good towards the end of his A's career but he continued to improve once he jumped to the NL.
Cardinals aren't the only team that has quite a few players that improve statistically because of the change of leagues. But when you mix LaRussa's roids (and if you think his players aren't roiding you're dumb) with the NL and you've got yourself a decent ballclub.
GO ROYALS........FUCK THE CARDINALS!!
The AL Central is en fuego! Twins and Royals are both winners of 11 of 12 and the Tigers are tearing it up as well and the White Sox have been steady.
13-3 for KC and Minnesota vs the NL. AL has won 60% of the interleague games, which I believe is the highest percentage they've ever won vs the NL. I remember at the beginning of the year a lot of people thought the NL had made up ground on the AL but that's been proven false.
One thing I notice from the NL is it's not that they don't have just about as many superstar players as the AL but the back end of the rotation, the teams defenses, and the bullpens just don't match up.
I'd consider the Royals bullpen overall maybe 4th or 5th best in the AL but I would take it up against ANY NL bullpen. I also think the Royals defensively are middle of the pack in the AL (although I believe we're in the top 2 in fielding %), but we'd be in the top 2-3 of the NL easily.
The Cardinals would not win more than 70 games in the AL. No way, no how. There's a reason they pick up bums that couldn't hack it in the AL and then go on to play for LaRussa and have good years in St. Louis. It's because the NL just isn't very good. Look at Chris Carpenter. Bum in Toronto turned Cy Young winner in STL, although I'd venture to guess steroids played a big role in that. Todd Wellemeyer? He was the worst pitcher I've ever seen in KC and that says a lot. Joel Pineiro? Dude was a piece of crap in Seattle. Isringhausen was pretty good towards the end of his A's career but he continued to improve once he jumped to the NL.
Cardinals aren't the only team that has quite a few players that improve statistically because of the change of leagues. But when you mix LaRussa's roids (and if you think his players aren't roiding you're dumb) with the NL and you've got yourself a decent ballclub.
GO ROYALS........FUCK THE CARDINALS!!