Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

[Doran]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

The Jays. Although they really can't be considered crappy (AL East "effect"), they ARE going downhill now that Halladay is gone. They're on the edge of a cliff, and once they fall, they'll be going into a rebuilding mode.

And, sadly, it's inevitable. This "might" be an okay year but after that, it's done. The O's can take 4th place.

I'll still play them.

[ParisB]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

Not to get off topic, but it annoys me how people think the AL East is better than it really is.

Just food for thought, Tampa Bay was 40-32 in the East, 12-21 in the West, and 19-20 against the Central.

Baltimore was 24-48 against the East and 12-23 against the West (same losing percentage)

Boston was 45-27 within their own division, and 13-21 against the West. The Yanks were 18 games over .500 in the East and 23-15 against the West.

As a whole, head to head, the West had a winning percentage against everybody else.

People just look at the overall standings and see Boston/NY and think wow the East is so amazing, but it's arguable that top to bottom the West is better. The east coast bias is so ridiculous these days. The Angels might be the only "elite" team in the west, but Seattle and Texas are better than Toronto and Tampa Bay, and Oakland is better than Baltimore. Say what you want to say about Texas, but that team puts up runs and is never an easy time in Arlington. Seattle is fiesty with their pitching, and Oakland has sick nasty young talent. As an Angels fan, I would rather face Toronto/TB/Bal any time, and I have always liekd the way they match up against NY. Boston is Boston, but I would rather be in the AL East, lol. Angels are around 105-70 against the East over the last couple of years.

People act like Toronto or Baltimore would be so much better in other divisions, but that is simply false.

[byobd4]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

The Jays. Although they really can't be considered crappy (AL East "effect"), they ARE going downhill now that Halladay is gone. They're on the edge of a cliff, and once they fall, they'll be going into a rebuilding mode.

And, sadly, it's inevitable. This "might" be an okay year but after that, it's done. The O's can take 4th place.

I'll still play them.

back in the day the orioles and jays would battle for first place a lot of the time

[cardsleadtheway]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

Not to get off topic, but it annoys me how people think the AL East is better than it really is.

Just food for thought, Tampa Bay was 40-32 in the East, 12-21 in the West, and 19-20 against the Central.

Baltimore was 24-48 against the East and 12-23 against the West (same losing percentage)

Boston was 45-27 within their own division, and 13-21 against the West. The Yanks were 18 games over .500 in the East and 23-15 against the West.

As a whole, head to head, the West had a winning percentage against everybody else.

People just look at the overall standings and see Boston/NY and think wow the East is so amazing, but it's arguable that top to bottom the West is better. The east coast bias is so ridiculous these days. The Angels might be the only "elite" team in the west, but Seattle and Texas are better than Toronto and Tampa Bay, and Oakland is better than Baltimore. Say what you want to say about Texas, but that team puts up runs and is never an easy time in Arlington. Seattle is fiesty with their pitching, and Oakland has sick nasty young talent. As an Angels fan, I would rather face Toronto/TB/Bal any time, and I have always liekd the way they match up against NY. Boston is Boston, but I would rather be in the AL East, lol. Angels are around 105-70 against the East over the last couple of years.

People act like Toronto or Baltimore would be so much better in other divisions, but that is simply false.

Right on! Now if only we can manage to hold on to our talent and not trade it away for 3-6 prospects each. That and a manager like Scioscia instead of that umpa lumpa Geren would put the A's back on top

[GEORGE LUZ]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

The Nats are fun to screw around with. Big-boy Adam Dunn alone makes it worthwhile to play with the Nats. Also, Zimmerman is one of the most underrated players in baseball. Toss in Willingham, Guzman, and Morgan and you have a decent team. Plus the stadium is cool.

Also, no-one gives the Rays any credit. They are not a crappy team. With the addition of Rafael Soriano, don't be surprised for another 2008-type year.

[bh446066]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

Playing with the Pirates as we speak...45-44 and 8.5 back in the division. Not too shabby for this team.

[TexasLeague]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

I hope your right Pistol. We need some young guys to really step up this year.

Try flip-flopping Lyon and Lindstrom. It's helped me preserve a few wins having Lindstrom come in throwing gas to end it. Just my two cents...

Agreed. My bet is that Lindstrom becomes the "everyday" closer as the season progresses and Lyon SU.

[Pistolero]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

Yeah, lately I've been using good'ol linny instead of lyons to close games. Pretty far the heater seems to be shutting down my opponents. What gives though, Linstrom has clocked fastballs to 102mph in the game it sells him short? But now that I think of it that was a while back he probably lost some velocity.Will see soon though what he can produce.

Another team I play with is the A's lost 2-7 to the nation last night. Lackey was pitching a shut out till the bottom of the ninth and Cust would have no part of it.

[Neil33]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

Gotta go w/ Pittsburgh. I love the uni variations and the stadium.

[Dodgersnlakers109]

Re: Which "crappy" team do you guys enjoy using?

I use the O's Im a beast with that line up, and we get to smash Boston in that division so its kind of sweet.