View Full Version : Fox sports preseason rankings.

Clement's beard
04-01-2005, 12:44 PM


04-01-2005, 12:45 PM
22!!! That's a good one. Keep up the good work, Fox!

04-01-2005, 12:48 PM
man I can't wait for the season to start... these things are driving me nuts already :nuts:

04-01-2005, 12:49 PM
There's no way the A's are better than the Angels.

As soon as I saw that, I decided to not even look at the rest.

The Racehorse
04-01-2005, 12:56 PM
Bulletin: Scott Podsednik isn't the answer. Neither is Ozzie Guillen's passion for small ball. In 2000, team was one of the youngest ever to make the playoffs. Also had a strong farm system in tow, making them uniquely poised for a run of dominance in the Central. That didn't happen. If this year's model flops, GM Kenny Williams needs to go.

Whoever wrote that doesn't know what's on MLB's immediate horizon... with 'roided players shrinking, baseball WILL become more execution-oriented [pitching, defense... small ball].

Btw, another national media-type :dtroll: on the SOX. GO FIGURE! :rolleyes:

04-01-2005, 12:59 PM
The Phillies at 4??? The A's at 6??? This guy just picked teams out of a hat.

04-01-2005, 01:08 PM
I've read articles from this genius, Dayn Perry. He knows his stuff and is about as good as all the other writers we've read about here.

04-01-2005, 01:09 PM
Or he threw darts at the wall.

04-01-2005, 01:10 PM
Well, according to FoxSports' list of experts on their 'other experts' drop down box, Tom Arnold qualifies, so what's that tell you?

Baby Fisk
04-01-2005, 01:23 PM
Boston-New York, 1-2. What balls on this guy! I hope someone rescues that little monkey whose butt they keep pulling these "predictions" out of. Poor little monkey. :(:

This is a list that cries out to be saved and reviewed come October.

04-01-2005, 01:24 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/fe/img/Writers/header/217.jpg:bong: Hey, I'm only taking after my parents, who don't know how to spell "Dan."

04-01-2005, 01:26 PM
Or he threw darts at the wall.

How else could the Tribe come ahead of the Braves? :?:

04-01-2005, 01:31 PM
This is the worst power ranking I have ever seen. When you have the Padres, A's, and Phillies ahead of the Braves and Angels then you know something is wrong. What in the world would make anyone think that the Phillies are the 4th best team?

04-01-2005, 01:35 PM
I don't even think the most ardent Phillies supporters could put them 4th and neither the most ardent A's fans put them 6th. Perry clearly just copied the PECOTA rankings and put them in the form of a power rankings thing as PECOTA was bullish on the A's and the Phillies and pretty much bullish or bearish on all the teams that he made such predictions for.

04-01-2005, 01:38 PM
Normally I say everybody is entitled to their own opinion, even if it doesn't align with the silver and black of WSI. But I can't find one morsel of logic in ANY of this hack's predictions. This is, by far, the most baseless ranking of the 29 major league teams by anyone associated with the sport of baseball.

Definitely deserving of a:dtroll:

04-01-2005, 02:05 PM
Rank of teams by projected PECOTA records:

1. Red Sox
2. Yankees
3. Cardinals
4. Athletics
5. Cubs
5. Phillies
7. Twins
8. Angels
9. Indians
10. Dodgers
11. Padres
11. Rangers

Compare with Perry's prediction:

1. Red Sox
2. Yankees
3. Cardinals
4. Phillies
5. Twins
6. A's
7. Padres
8. Angels
9. Cubs
10. Dodgers
11. Indians
12. Braves

They are clearly fundamentally different

04-02-2005, 11:51 AM
I haven't been chugging the silver and black Kool-Aid like a lot of people around here, but these predictions are absurd. For all of the reasons earlier posters mentioned as well as the fact that the Sox are behind the Reds. The Reds? This is the same Reds team who doesn't have one major league caliber starting pitcher on their whole team. The same Reds team whose best player has a hamstring made of swiss cheese. The same Reds team who plays Adam Dunn and his .220 average and 220 strikeouts every year. *****.

04-02-2005, 12:56 PM
Are these "Dayn's" power rankings? I thought the whole point of power rankings is that they take all polls and rankings into consideration, and compile one master power ranking. As much as one may disagree with ESPN power rankings, at least they consider the rankings of half a dozen of their "experts."

How did "Dayn" get a power ranking column? Why don't I have one? Or Bob? Or Jim?

I don't think the Sox are WS contenders, nor do I think they should be ALC favorites. But how do Milwaukee, Detriot, Cincy, Philly, Baltimore, SD, Texas, and Cleveland all leapfrog the Sox without significantly improving their team. I can see taking a risk on Florida, NYM, and SF...at least they improved.

Last question: how did the Injuns get so much better in the offseason? JuanGon is washed up and on the DL. Milwood might downgrade their staff. Their leader Vizquel is gone. Their bullpen is still atrocious. If Martinez, Blake, and Co. improve their numbers this year as much as they did last year, they go .500.

04-02-2005, 09:17 PM
For a "journalist" that doesn't have a particular affection towards the White Sox all have this dumb minded view and it goes as follows: The Sox lost Carlos Lee and Magglio Ordonez, so they must be worse than they were last year. To me that seems to be the extent of their research, and as we all know, thats not an accurate way to judge this teams off season, so with that in mind I dont really care what these idiots print anymore.

04-02-2005, 09:29 PM
To me that seems to be the extent of their research, and as we all know, thats not an accurate way to judge this teams off season, so with that in mind I dont really care what these idiots print anymore.

No one should take these predictions so serious. Their guess is just as good as ours. The season will speak for itself. If the team is good, they will win. Just sit back and enjoy the season.

Johnny Mostil
04-02-2005, 10:31 PM
The Phillies at 4??? The A's at 6??? This guy just picked teams out of a hat.

Ummm, I don't think he was picking these numbers out of his hat . . .

Seriously, though, I thought the comment about 2000 and the farm system was legitimate enough, though one that's been hashed over (and over and over) here before . . .