Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
ESPN offers its first Power Rankings today and the Blue Jays merit ninth place. In Buster Olney's opinion, the "Jays will cause problems for the Red Sox and Yankees, but a couple of pitching injuries would be devastating."

The Jays' AL East foes New York and Boston top the list, followed by the Phillies and Cubs, with Detroit logically anchored at the bottom.

A few other thoughts:





Ninth for the Blue Jays sounds about right to me. As for the comment about the devastation of a couple of pitching injuries, that could apply to any team. What happens to New York if Brown and Mussina are injured?

The Jays' new logo is cool. The Ranger logo is a lame imitation of Montreal's, and Texas should revert to the "cowboy hat on ball" logo of the 1970s.

The biggest surprise is the ranking of the Orioles at 23rd, just one spot above the D-Rays. I would have expected a placement of 14-17 given the signing of Tejada, Lopez, Palmeiro and Ponson. Olney is right about the rotation, though; it's awfully thin.

The Athletics at 6th feels a little high, but I don't know who I'd rank above them.

No NL West team ranks higher than 11th or lower than 21st.

The last two teams, the Tigers and Brewers, have a plan. You may disagree with their plans, but at least these franchises appear to have a framework for improvement in place. Do the Pirates (ranked 28th) have a plan beyond ruining Craig Wilson's career?

ESPN's Will To Power | 16 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
_greenfrog - Wednesday, February 25 2004 @ 09:37 PM EST (#77596) #
It'll be interesting to check the pre-season rankings next year. Esp. the Yankees, Red Sox and Jays. (Maybe: 3, 5, 7?)
_Donkit R.K. - Wednesday, February 25 2004 @ 10:31 PM EST (#77597) #
?
robertdudek - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 12:15 AM EST (#77598) #
I'd have ranked the Athletics 3rd, after the Yankees and Red Sox. They really are a solid team and all of the strongest teams in the NL (Phillies, Braves, Cubs, Astros and Cardinals) have significant weaknesses.
_Shrike - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 12:22 AM EST (#77599) #
Calling the A's offense solid is surely sarcasm of the highest order.
Gitz - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 12:36 AM EST (#77600) #
The AL looks very strong this year -- the individual talent exodus from the NL has been remarkable.

As an AL-only rotisserie player, I'm drooling over all the new talent that arrived. If I didn't already have a rotation of Mulder, Zito, and Halladay, one player -- I'll just stick to one, but there are so many! -- I'd pursue is Javier Vazquez, because, like many people here in Blogville, I've followed his career closely and have always been a fan. Now that he's in New York, people will realize what a buzz saw he is; he's Matt Morris with more bite to his fastball. If only he was a Blue Jay!
Gitz - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 12:37 AM EST (#77601) #
Oh, and Lucas: remind me of the Brewers plan again?
_Jurgen - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 01:14 AM EST (#77602) #
http://somecalzoneforderek.blogspot.com/
...all of the strongest teams in the NL (Phillies, Braves, Cubs, Astros and Cardinals) have significant weaknesses.

Yes, if you count Larry Bowa, the Phils have the most significant weakness of all.

Other than that, they're solid.

(Aren't they?)

1-9 looks about right (although I think the Jays should be higher than the post-Lee, post-Pudge Fish--try saying that three times fast).

#10 is just plain wrong. The Bavasied Mariners will be lucky to get 85 wins. The Cards, Braves, Twins, Royals are all better clubs, if you ask me.
robertdudek - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 01:37 AM EST (#77603) #
Why?

They were league average last year - don't forget the park they play in.
_Shrike - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 01:43 AM EST (#77604) #
Actually, I watched my first game in Oakland last summer--I appreciate its a pitcher's park. I just don't expect their offense to be any better than it was last year (in fact I think it will be a little worse). The loss of Tejada is huge, and not offset by the rest of Beane's moves.
_Matt - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 01:54 AM EST (#77605) #
I absolutely love the assessment of the pirates

They are reduced to plucking the free agent leftovers every year, like Mondesi. If the Pirates were a movie, they'd be Caddyshack 4.

fantastic
_Oggman - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 12:44 PM EST (#77606) #
Why?

They were league average last year - don't forget the park they play in.


I guess it depends on what the defintion of "Solid" is. Ballpark or not beyond Chavez I can't think of one player that is even an average offensive player for his position. I'll give you Dye if he can return to his former, pre-leg break self, but other than that? I just don't see it.
_Jonny German - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 01:07 PM EST (#77607) #
beyond Chavez I can't think of one player that is even an average offensive player for his position.

I agree that the Oakland offense is questionable, but your imagination must be broke. Durazo and Kotsay are easily league average or better at DH and CF. It's not inconceivable that Ellis and Kielty could be league average. Who knows what Crosby and the catchers will do? That's six players/positions, plus Chavez and Dye.

I'd put the over/under at 5.5 on how many positions the A's will get league average or better production from in 2004.
_bob mong - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 02:41 PM EST (#77608) #
http://vdub_bobby.blogspot.com
#10 is just plain wrong. The Bavasied Mariners will be lucky to get 85 wins. The Cards, Braves, Twins, Royals are all better clubs, if you ask me.

I dunno. The Mariners will have a pretty decent lineup, which will probably be masked by their park to some extent:

Ichiro, Winn, Boone, Edgar, Ibanez, Olerud, Spiezio, Aurilia, Wilson/Davis - that's a pretty kick-azz top-four, and the remaining five are probably average. Well, maybe not the catcher - the big IF on offense is the age/fragility of the team and, relatedly, their awful bench.

The real problem is whether the slightly improved offense can make up for the hugely degraded defense - I'm guessing the Mariners' pitching and defense declines a ton in 2004, especially the starters, who ain't exactly a bunch of strikeout artists. The bullpen will probably be fine.

I don't see them as worse than the Twins or Royals, though. If nothing else, the Mariners have about twice as much pitching depth as both of those teams.
Lucas - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 03:37 PM EST (#77609) #
I have full faith in Bavasi's ability to destroy the Mariners, but it will take time. Seattle has another 90+ win season in them if they stay healthy. Depth is a problem; their bench is atrocious.

On the other hand, Bavasi has a partner in crime ready to do damage now. In the process of batting Ichiro! third and keeping the sacrosanct left/right/left/right-handedness of the batting order, Melvin is thinking of batting Ibanez fifth, Martinez sixth and Olerud seventh. Maybe that doesn't make too much difference statistically, but it's blinkered logic nonetheless.
Mike Green - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 04:20 PM EST (#77610) #
Four reasons why the Mariners will decline by more than 5 wins from last year's 93:

1. They're an old team. Boone, Olerud and Edgar are all vulnerable to significant offensive deterioration.

2. Their pitchers don't strike out many.

3. They've lost Mike Cameron.

4. The competition in their division has on balance improved. The Angels should be much better, and the Rangers should be a little better (the age-related improvements from Nix, Teixeira and Blalock more than offsetting the difference between Rodriguez and Soriano).

The wild card is the development of their young pitchers, some of whom will strike out enough to succeed even without Cameron roaming centerfield.
_Blue in SK - Thursday, February 26 2004 @ 05:22 PM EST (#77611) #
http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/listranker?id=40
Don't agree with the ESPN rankings? Then COMN and do your rankings. Kinda fun, and you get to compare your rankings against the ESPN rankings.
ESPN's Will To Power | 16 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.