Angeles- a sleeper team?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    moon, good stats.  The depth of the sox hitting is even more of a factor than thier pitching as to why they own the yankees.  Yankees have no chance to catch the sox this year.
    Posted by can-you-dig-it

    When healthy, having Swisher batting 7th is pretty deep.

    The Yanks have 5 of 9 starters ovr .800 and Cahvez on the bench at .800, but I agree, our hitting is very deep.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    Rivera came in to pitch in the 9th, with one out, two on. 0-0 count, 3 run homer by Branyon. He got the save, final 6-5, but the NYY have to be concerned about Rivera
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    LIke I said, you can't win a world series with a closer with an era over 2...........can't be done
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    well greatestNYY, Rivera has an era over 2 and the yankees can't win the world series this year...........is that enough proof for you.
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    correct
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    Rivera came in to pitch in the 9th, with one out, two on. 0-0 count, 3 run homer by Branyon. He got the save, final 6-5, but the NYY have to be concerned about Rivera
    Posted by J-BAY
    Hi J, not ready to throw Mo under the bus, but i'm starting to wonder if that tricep issue isn't creeping forth again...he's just not sharp right now...
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jete02fan. Show jete02fan's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    LIke I said, you can't win a world series with a closer with an era over 2...........can't be done
    Posted by can-you-dig-it
    guess the Sox won't be winning the WS then?...
    201130BOSAL401.0003.14

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    that is a different issue with the sox.  They don't need a closer like the yankees do.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from WC5842. Show WC5842's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    First Pitch swinging, Branyan for some reason hits the Yankees well.   Mo was lights out last Friday, on Sunday Nunez's inexperience cost Mo the save. Red Sox and their fans should worry about that 8th and 9th inning combo.  Not Mo
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    no, it is Dr. Galea, Arod introduced me along with Gradyson
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beantowne. Show Beantowne's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team? : Yankees 6 Angels 2.  Entschuldigung
    Posted by LS350


    After todays loss the Angels hopes of catching the Yankees or Sox, took a big hit...Entering the series had they swept it would've been game on. Losing 2 of 3 pretty much seals thier fate to battling Texas for the AL West tittle...If you're handicaping the race the Angels have the horses to keep pace with the Rangers who dispite having one of the best rosters in the game, are still only on pace to win 90 games...
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    that is a different issue with the sox.  They don't need a closer like the yankees do.
    Posted by can-you-dig-it


    This is commonly known as moving the goalposts.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    Angels are looking pretty weak right now.  Izturis's error made all four of those grand slam runs unearned.  Talk about choking.  You know why he made that error?  He was looking in the dugout for Scioscia's signal on what to do. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    Hey NHSteven, great to see you back.  Last time we spoke you said you were putting me on ignore, so much for that.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from mikeyinthebronx. Show mikeyinthebronx's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    no, it is Dr. Galea, Arod introduced me along with Gradyson
    Posted by can-you-dig-it


    I wonder what Doctor/vitamins Ellsbury is using as he had 20 home runs in the previous 1,372 at bats in his career and this year astonishingly he has 19 home runs in 477 at bats.  Those must be some powerful vitamins!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    Yes, I have been saying for a month now watch out for the Angels. I think there is a strong possibility that the Wild Card won't come from the East; the Angels have just a good a chance of The Sox or yankees and Rangers of making the playoffs.  Right now, today, my money would be on the Angels being the WC team......
    Posted by andrewmitch


    If we play just .550 the rest of the way, then LAA has to play .759 the rest of the way.  BP lists their chances of the WC at 0.2%
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from WC5842. Show WC5842's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    well greatestNYY, Rivera has an era over 2 and the yankees can't win the world series this year...........is that enough proof for you.
    Posted by can-you-dig-it

    They are the Yankees, they can always win the World Series.... Don't let two Tainted Championships cloud your vision.




     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    Hey NHSteven, great to see you back.  Last time we spoke you said you were putting me on ignore, so much for that.
    Posted by can-you-dig-it


    I just can't resist your phantasmagorical charm.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    Simple fact:  the three best offenses in the AL also have the best W-L records:  Boston, NY, and Texas, in that order.  The Sox score fewer runs on the road, but they still score enough to win ball games and have the best road record in MLB.  That said, I entirely agree that the good pitch no hit Angels are in the hunt for the AL West title.  I don't see them beating out the Yankees or Sox for the wild card. 
    Posted by maxbialystock


    Simple fact: NY/BS/TX play in the 3 greatest hitter venues. That's why they are perceived to be the 3 best hitting teams. The disparity would be far lesser if they played in CA or Oakland or Seattle. In fact, they'd be mid-pack in Safeco. Put the Angels in Fenway and the RedSox in CA and the "no hit" Angels would out hit Boston.

    This year, these"no hit" Angels are hitting .321 in Fenway( 180 PA's), with an .847 OPS - as opposed to Boston's .704 OPS in CA. Get the picture?

    Tell me Max: Who are the top 3-4 pitching teams on the road?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    Harness, I agree the Sox pitching staff ERA suffers from the Fenway syndrome and is actually pretty decent on the road.  That said, the Sox hitting does not suffer that much on the road,averaging 5.1 runs (tied for top in MLB), compared to 5.8 runs at home.  For the Angels, getting into the playoffs is not simply a matter of three great starters.  You also need some hitting, some defense, and two other starters.  That's what it takes to get into the playoffs.  Once there, three great starters can make a big difference. 
    Posted by maxbialystock


    I've already shown how these "three great Angel's starters" are compromised in hitting venues.

    As for how Boston hits on the road, it's relevant to individual venue. Here's a potential road Post Season picture:

    RedSox in Detroit: .800 OPS (139 AB's)
    Tigers in Detroit:  .759 OPS

    Advantage Boston.

    RedSox in NY: .867 OPS (211 AB's)
    NY in NY:       .813 OPS

    Advantage Boston

    RedSox in TX: .609 OPS (100 AB's)
    TX in TX:        .759 OPS

    Advantage TX.

    I think the low OPS in TX was reflective of the point in time when we played them.
    But either way, TX plays the RedSox tough in their home venue.

    IMO, I don't think Boston can beat the other three best teams (TX/NY/Philly) this year in the PO's.
    In fact, I don't think any team can. Winning the division means a likelihood of a TX/NY series. Thus, one of them will bump the other off.

    And this increases our chances.
    It may all come down to who wins the A. L. East...
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team? : Simple fact : NY/BS/TX play in the 3 greatest hitter venues. That's why they are perceived to be the 3 best hitting teams. The disparity would be far lesser if they played in CA or Oakland or Seattle. In fact, they'd be mid-pack in Safeco. Put the Angels in Fenway and the RedSox in CA and the "no hit" Angels would out hit Boston. This year, these"no hit" Angels are hitting .321 in Fenway( 180 PA's), with an .847 OPS - as opposed to Boston's .704 OPS in CA. Get the picture? Tell me Max : Who are the top 3-4 pitching teams on the road?
    Posted by harness

    In terms of road ERA, the American League has the Rangers at 3.15, the Yankees at 3.32, the Red Sox at 3.57, the White Sox at 3.66, the Angels at 3.79, Blue Jays at 3.84, the Mariners at 3.87 and the Indians at 3.98.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from kannaman. Show kannaman's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?:
    In Response to Re: Angeles- a sleeper team? : Simple fact : NY/BS/TX play in the 3 greatest hitter venues. That's why they are perceived to be the 3 best hitting teams. The disparity would be far lesser if they played in CA or Oakland or Seattle. In fact, they'd be mid-pack in Safeco. Put the Angels in Fenway and the RedSox in CA and the "no hit" Angels would out hit Boston. This year, these"no hit" Angels are hitting .321 in Fenway( 180 PA's), with an .847 OPS - as opposed to Boston's .704 OPS in CA. Get the picture? Tell me Max : Who are the top 3-4 pitching teams on the road?
    Posted by harness

    Yeah but don't forget we won 2 games in that series..Buchholz and Lester...and lost 2 ..Dice and Lackey....when they were awful. I'm sure the Angels numbers were inflated quite a bit...the Lackey game we lost 11-0 probably the biggest blow out of the year.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Angeles- a sleeper team?

    In fact, I don't think any team can. Winning the division means a likelihood of a TX/NY series. Thus, one of them will bump the other off.

    And this increases our chances.
    It may all come down to who wins the A. L. East...

    It seems that way.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share