2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

[jake44np]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

JBH, I don't think the argument is about payroll, I think it's about expectations.

A lot of people expect Arizona and Colorado to be the top two teams, but they also acknowledge that the Dodgers are a pretty good team. LA is a team that a lot of people picked to win the division last year (myself included) and having them sign Andruw Jones and Joe Torre only boosts expectations.

So I think that just because a team is a not favorite does not mean they're a sleeper. Teams that are not expected to do much and then make noise in the final two months at possibly being a playoff team are sleepers. LA is expected to win, Cincy, by and large, is not.

Did you get JBH's approval before coming to this conclusion?
Because he wants everyone that doesnt agree with his point of views approval before posting.

[jake44np]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

Short answer...Because I said so.

I must have made one hell of a post for you to answer it twice.

I think you idea of a sleeper is alot different then everyone else's.
By the way you need to count to 10 and calm down, there was no need to jump me just because I dont agree with you. These forums are all about giving opinoins and I was mearly giving mine.

[joshuar9476]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

According to , the #1 NL sleeper team is *drum roll*...



$ The Cincinnati Reds

WOOHOO!! i was going to select them before i read this too.

[SPTO]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

From a pure baseball standpoint I can't argue with the pick but as a realist I have this nagging feeling that the Reds will never win as long as they play in the sandbox that is Great American Ballpark.

[jake44np]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

From a pure baseball standpoint I can't argue with the pick but as a realist I have this nagging feeling that the Reds will never win as long as they play in the sandbox that is Great American Ballpark.

Why the Rockies won in Coors Field this year.

Both teams have to pitch in the same park, why does a team that plays in a hitter friendly park have a disadvantage?

[SPTO]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

Why the Rockies won in Coors Field this year.

They had to humidify the baseballs just to make the park play like a realistic park. You can't do that in Cincy.

The only way the Reds have a shot longterm is they have a bunch of groundball pitchers.

[CMH]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

They just don't have enough pitching.

That would matter if they didn't play in the NL Central where no one has enough pitching.

[flute_316]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

I would agree with the Reds.
Many people dont realize how good Jay Bruce is going to be.
He is the best prospect in all of bball.
If Homer Bailey can live up to his potential they have a serious shot at winning the NL Central.
They would have been right in the mix last year but their bullpen blew 30 saves last year!
The signing of Cordero will fix alot of there bullpen issues, now Weathers can move to a set up role and Bill Bray is finally healthy and can be a great LH reliever.

Their offense could be great, check out there lineup.
1. Brandon Phillips 2B (30/30 man)
2. Jay Bruce CF (best prospect in baseball, was minor league POY in all of baseball last year)
3. Ken Griffey Jr RF (must stay healthy again)
4. Adam Dunn LF (count on another 40 hr 100 rbi season)
5. Edwin Encarnacion 3B (had a great second half last year, ended up at .289 16hr 76rbi)
6. Joey Votto (batted .321 4hr 17 rbi in 24 games last year)
7. Alex Gonzalez SS
8. David Ross C (must bounce back to his 2006 form)

I am not for sure if Phillips will bat 1st or not, same with Bruce I am not for sure where he will hit in the lineup.

I have to agree.. They will be much better. Jay Bruce is going to be the real deal, I saw him play alot when he was in A-ball..This dude could be better then Dwight Smith or Jerome Walton of 1989... J/K had to poke some fun of them Scrubs.. Bruce will be a All-Star if if remains healthy no doubt.. Makes the Josh Hamilton trade look alot better that is for sure..He has all the tools.

[ryanm1058123]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

i think we all forget one thing.. who manages the team, dusty baker.

that alone will stop them from being a great team.

that being said jay bruce is gonna be a freaking stud

[CMH]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

I seriously don't understand why Dusty Baker is associated with baseball.

He must have some really crazy photos or information on the higher ups in MLB and ESPN.

[JBH3]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

I must have made one hell of a post for you to answer it twice.

I think you idea of a sleeper is alot different then everyone else's.
By the way you need to count to 10 and calm down, there was no need to jump me just because I dont agree with you. These forums are all about giving opinoins and I was mearly giving mine.

I found your post to be condescending, and didn't really like your tone.

Plus I tend to notice that you like to bash my posts as evident in other threads, and I don't really see it as you plainly stating your opinion. That's what I did, and you jumped on it...I wouldn't consider you as merely disagreeing...so if I can't state my opinion why should you be able to?

Looking at the NL as a whole I dont see how you cannot count LA as a sleeper. They play in a comeptitive division...Arizona has made moves, Colorado has a lot of talent, and San Diego has pitching and Petco. Those 3 teams fair better in competing for that division than LA does. LA has had some lofty expectations, but that does count them out of the sleeper category. Atlanta is two wins better than LA, and in a tight division too. Their chances of winning the NL East are slim, but yet they have a lot of talent...can I not say they are a sleeper? Lets eliminate the non-sleepers...NYM, PHI, MIL, CHI, ARI, COL, and SD.

Everyone else is either a sleeper...Or in the cases of WAS, PIT, FLA, and SF... nothing.

[jake44np]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

I found your post to be condescending, and didn't really like your tone.

Plus I tend to notice that you like to bash my posts as evident in other threads, and I don't really see it as you plainly stating your opinion. That's what I did, and you jumped on it...I wouldn't consider you as merely disagreeing...so if I can't state my opinion why should you be able to?

Looking at the NL as a whole I dont see how you cannot count LA as a sleeper. They play in a comeptitive division...Arizona has made moves, Colorado has a lot of talent, and San Diego has pitching and Petco. Those 3 teams fair better in competing for that division than LA does. LA has had some lofty expectations, but that does count them out of the sleeper category. Atlanta is two wins better than LA, and in a tight division too. Their chances of winning the NL East are slim, but yet they have a lot of talent...can I not say they are a sleeper? Lets eliminate the non-sleepers...NYM, PHI, MIL, CHI, ARI, COL, and SD.

Everyone else is either a sleeper...Or in the cases of WAS, PIT, FLA, and SF... nothing.

I never once said you couldnt have your own opinion but I will make sure I never disagree with your opinion ever again! NOT, if I dont agree with what someone says I will disagree with them. I will try to watch the way I disagree with you from now on though. I was not trying to disrespect you, just disagreeing with you.

[bkrich83]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

I never once said you couldnt have your own opinion but I will make sure I never disagree with your opinion ever again! NOT, if I dont agree with what someone says I will disagree with them. I will try to watch the way I disagree with you from now on though. I was not trying to disrespect you, just disagreeing with you.

Straighten up and Fly Right!!!

[SlimKibbles]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

They should trade away Griffey and then they're a lock to win it all.

I love Junior. I really do. But it feels like I've been deliberately averting my eyes from the truth that you are probably right saying that. They wouldn't be a lock though. Since Junior came home, something has been different with the team and in the clubhouse. I don't know what it is. Is it just a coincidence that they damn near made the playoffs the season before he arrived and haven't sniffed them since? Maybe there are other factors involved (dumb GM's, managers, injuries, etc) but it's hard not to look at that. It's like they don't try as hard because Junior's a superstar and figure if they can't pull through, Junior will. For some reason I just remember Dmitri Young and how he fell off stats-wise when Junior showed up. Seemed like everyone was doing the same thing. Anyway, all that being said, if they trade Junior, it won't be until he reaches 600. Home games will sell out to see him hit 600 even if it takes a month.

As for them being a sleeper, I guess it's possible. They really have to stay healthy. Edinson Volquez is going to have to prove BIG TIME that he was worth trading Josh Hamilton away. That trade still bugs the hell out of me.

[DrJones]

Re: 2008 #1 NL Sleeper Team is...

I seriously don't understand why Dusty Baker is associated with baseball.

He must have some really crazy photos or information on the higher ups in MLB and ESPN.

Baker has no end of faults, no question (runs young pitchers into the ground, thinks taking a walk "clogs up the basepaths", has an unhealthy obsession with Neifi Perez, etc.).

But it doesn't surprise me that he keeps getting job offers. Dusty came up to Vancouver's EA studio once to give a speech/Q&A session with the (at the time) Triple Play team. Very well-spoken and charismatic dude. One of the few people I've met who really had "presence" and could command a room's attention. I don't doubt for a second that he's a fantastic motivator, well respected by players, and excellent at the interview process.

NOTE: Dusty's visit was shortly after the 2000 World Series. Somebody asked him if he thought Clemens intentionally tried to hit Piazza with the sawed-off bat. Dusty's response: "Of course he did! If I was Piazza, I would've killed the mother******!"