PDA

View Full Version : Baseball's biggest underachievers


OurBitchinMinny
09-16-2004, 02:31 AM
Which team has underachieved the most this year?

balke
09-16-2004, 03:39 AM
Angels. I stick with the Angels. It's a tough division, but man is that a season and about 103 mil washed down the drain. They still have hope, I'd like to see them pull it around.


Seattle and Phillies are pretty big disappointments payroll wise. Seattle sucked coming in, everyone knew it, even them. They really should've found a way to dump payroll in the offseason.

Phillies could theoretically still make it... doubt it. Had a few injuries to big names, but biggest killer was not beating the teams that mattered.

StillMissOzzie
09-16-2004, 08:58 AM
Angels. I stick with the Angels. It's a tough division, but man is that a season and about 103 mil washed down the drain. They still have hope, I'd like to see them pull it around.

Phillies could theoretically still make it... doubt it. Had a few injuries to big names, but biggest killer was not beating the teams that mattered.
Phillies in NL = White Sox in AL ?

SMO
:gulp:

SOXSINCE'70
09-16-2004, 09:02 AM
The White Sox in the A.L., the Phils and sCrUBS in the N.L.

Baby Fisk
09-16-2004, 10:21 AM
I'm tainted by the media influence up here, but I voted Black Jays. They were definitely a dark horse WC candidate in the spring, but they not only failed to achieve that, they actually went backwards (rotation and bullpen both collapsed, currently in last place, on pace to lose 90+ games, manager Carlos Tosca got sacked a month ago, homegrown star Delgado set to leave, etc etc). GM J.P. Ricciardi promised big things but this year looks very bad on him.

doublem23
09-16-2004, 10:27 AM
No doubt in my mind it's been the Phillies.

OEO Magglio
09-16-2004, 11:44 AM
Phillies in NL = White Sox in AL ?

SMO
:gulp:
Phillies and Sox no doubt in my mind.

HomeFish
09-16-2004, 12:37 PM
Oh, come on. Nobody expected anything from the White Sox at season's begining except the optimists here. They're not underachievers -- they were overachievers until Frank and Magglio got out.

Philadelphia is the clear winner here. They have always been underachievers. They have the worst record in the history of baseball -- worse than both the Cubs and the Sox.

WinningUgly!
09-16-2004, 01:23 PM
Oh, come on. Nobody expected anything from the White Sox at season's begining except the optimists here. They're not underachievers -- they were overachievers until Frank and Magglio got out.

Philadelphia is the clear winner here. They have always been underachievers. They have the worst record in the history of baseball -- worse than both the Cubs and the Sox.
Thanks for posting what I was thinking.:D:

At the end of March, most baseball "experts" had the Sox somewhere behind the Twinks & Royals.

shagar69
09-16-2004, 02:09 PM
the mets are always underachievers. they spend like 100 mil and dont do jack!