Actually the hat is an American Eagle hat, I can't stand the Athletics. Also I said 2 were great pitchers, the other were either or, and I don't know which it is, they are never consistant. Also weren't these the same experts that predicted the Pats were going to crush the Giants in the 2007 Super bowl? The same people who predicted the Pats were Super Bowl faves before last season as well? Hmm, they do seem pretty reliable, I am also pretty sure they would never have predicted the Giants as well, no one can predict sports, its easily the most unpredictable events.
What would you tear apart, you speak with emotion as your a Sox fan, nothing wrong with that, but facts are the facts, and you can't argue with statistics. I can't see how using those "experts" for betting favorites is a strong argument.
I'm voting for Grogan14 but not because I agree with his argument, but because I disagree with cwgarg so strongly.
If you want to look at facts, lets look at facts. The Sox won 89 games last year which was 10th in baseball (5th in the AL) even with the injuries and "horrible" pitching. The two best offensive players to find new homes during the off-season game to Boston.
The Red Sox offense which was one of the top in baseball last year even with the injuries and will only be more dangerous this year. They were in the top six in all of baseball in batting average, runs per game, total runs, total hits, OBP, Slugging and OPS.
While I agree that pitching staff needs help, not as much as you think. The top two in the rotation are Jon Lester (19 wins) and Clay Buchholtz (17 wins), who both received Cy Young votes last year. Jon Lackey (14 wins) is your number three (not to bad) and you are rounding out the rotation with a healthy Josh Beckett and Dice K, again not to bad. There are not to many (or any) other teams in baseball that can match that starting 5. Yes the bullpen does need help and I don't think the Sox are done there yet.
Also don't forget they added Curt Young as the new pitching coach. Young had great success with the Oakland Athletics who led the AL in ERA and shut outs last year.
As far as the experts go, I agree that they can be ignored in the grand scheme of things but they can be considered "fact" for this argument because your whole argument is the Red Sox are not the "favorite," and the odds makers disagree in that regard. Also stop with the Giants/Pats references, different sport.
Sorry post was too long had to break it up. I have one question for cwgarg, if the sox are not the favorite who is and why?
Argument is null and void now. Philly is the favorite to win the World Series and to be honest, it's not all that close on paper. That rotation with Lee is disgustingly good and I can't imagine anyone making a claim that someone is better on paper than the Phils.
As for the Sawx, the acquistions are nice, but if they don't build a bullpen, they could lose a lot of games due to ineptness in that area. Plus, their lineup is VERY left handed heavy this year. If a team has solid left handed pitching, that team could really pose a problem to the Red Sox.
I must ask though, if you subtract Victor Martinez and Adrian Beltre to add Crawford and Gonzalez, are you that much better? You could say Martinez is a liability in the field, but you didn't add a better catcher so that point is void. Thus, you took away 2 good hitters (1 switch and one right handed) to add 2 good left handed hitters. You also added two good defenders but took away a gold glove 3rd baseman. I think the moves are decent, but it's not blowing me away like it is others. If the Sox are healthy, they are better, but they aren't 15 games better due to their acquisitions. Should also be interesting to see if the pieces they traded to get Gonzalez turn out to be solid major leaguers. I think they gave up a lot to get him.
I hate when people say teams look good "on paper." "On paper" and "on the field" are two different things. If the best team "on paper" actually won every year, the Yankees would have won all throughout the 2000s. I think Adrian Gonzalez is going to be a bust. I think his numbers will drop in the AL East - even if he is hitting in Fenway Park. Like what MouthoftheSouthShore said, Victor Martinez was amazing, and he's gone. So if A-Gon takes his place offensively, then the only difference is Crawford.
Its not just getting Crawford and Gonzalez that is making a difference, its adding them to what the Sox already have. And the big point that mouth is missing is the injuries that the Sox dealt with last year.
The Sox were wrecked by injury last year and only used their opening day starting lineup 4 times. They used a total of 143 different lineups last year, 30 different position players, 23 different pitchers (25 if you include two position players). A majority of those injuries were to the outfield (12 players logged at least an inning in the OF last year) and All Stars like Kevin Youkilis, Dustin Pedroia, Victor Martinez and Josh Beckett.
Getting back to the Gonzalez/Martinez offensive wash, I agree the numbers were the same, this is also a move for the future. Martinez is about to turn 32 and historically speaking, especially for catchers, his offensive number can only start to go downhill. Gonzalez is 28 and in the prime of his career with many good years ahead of him.
Virginia I do agree that "on paper" and "on the field" are two different things but what makes you think Gonzalez will be a bust?
Anywhere this is all moot because Philly is now the favorite.
You must be logged in leave a comment.
A FanVsFan Challenge is a structured debate between two fans. Each fan gets two turns to prove their case and silence their rival. Other fans can view, vote and comment on the debate. Get involved and vote on the debates below.
See Full Leaderboard
This Fanbowl sponsored by
Spring Training Gets Underway
A Preview of the 2014 New York Yankees
YANKEES MOURN THE PASSING OF CARMEN BERRA
2014 MLB Preview (American League East)
Mets need to bring Noah back to New York
Listen to Episode 3 of Stache Radio