Jump to content

Which AL Central lineup to you fear more?


Steve9347

AL Central lineup questionairre  

28 members have voted

  1. 1. Who is more fearsome?

    • Cleveland Indians
      3
    • Detroit Tigers
      25


Recommended Posts

There has been a lot of talk about this, so I thought projecting the lineups might give folks a more concrete semblance of what to expect. Please, do discuss.

 

Cleveland projected

CF Grady Sizemore

SS Jhonny Peralta

DH Travis Hafner

C Victor Martinez

1B Ryan Garko

3B Casey Blake

LF Jason Michaels

RF Franklin Gutierrez

2B Asdrubal Cabrera

 

Detroit projected

CF Curtis Granderson

SS Edgar Renteria

3B Miguel Cabrera

RF Magglio Ordonez

DH Gary Sheffield

1B Carlos Guillen

C Ivan Rodriguez

2B Placido Polanco

LF Marcus Thames

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(bschmaranz @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 11:20 AM)
All I have to say is I hope the Tigers have a lot of injuries. Jacque Jones isn't projected in LF?

This was my projection. I think Jacque will split time with Thames. Considering they have plenty of power, would YOU start Jones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Tigers have more "Sure thing, veteran players". But those type of players sometimes wind up getting old or injured all of a sudden.

 

The Indians have more "Risky thing, young players who could tear things up", but those players sometimes have off years or don't develop.

 

On balance, I'm still a fan of that Indians lineup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 12:23 PM)
Yeah, once you see the players actually in the lineup, it really becomes obvious.

The only thing we can hope for is the same thing that happened to us last year happens to them, but I highly doubt it will. If it does, they have a lot of question marks on that pitching staff that won't be able to hold them over. But right now yeah I really am kind of scared to play them. I don't even think the Yankees have been this strong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 12:26 PM)
Tigers with Cabrera now. But declines from last year expected from Maggs, Polanco, Renteria, and Granderson.

The old guys maybe, but I don't expect Granderson to go anywhere anytime soon. He is beastly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(lostfan @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 11:28 AM)
The old guys maybe, but I don't expect Granderson to go anywhere anytime soon. He is beastly.

 

He's good. But I don't think he's as good as 2007. We'll see.

 

Sizemore's 2006 was similar to Granderson's 2007. Sizemore's 2007 was quite good but not great. Granderson could have a good year next year where his OPS drops 50 or 60 points. Nothing tells me that he's guaranteed not to come back to Earth a little. We'll see.

Edited by Vance Law
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 12:40 PM)
He's good. But I don't think he's as good as 2007. We'll see.

I just think he is. He showed flashes of what he could be his rookie year if he cut down on his strikeout numbers, and he did. He has power and crazy speed, he hits a ridiculous number of triples. Plus he's a highlight reel on defense. I'd be surprised if his numbers declined, or weren't something close to 2007.

 

I think Sizemore = Granderson btw

Edited by lostfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 01:22 PM)
This was my projection. I think Jacque will split time with Thames. Considering they have plenty of power, would YOU start Jones?

 

It's sounding like Thames might not even be offered arbitration by the Tigers. Jones is their starting left-fielder as of today.

 

That Detroit lineup (regardless of whether Thames or Jones or my grandmother Ethel start)...is going to be filthy and will score ridiculous amounts of runs. Noticably more dangerous from top to bottom than the Indians IMHO.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(lostfan @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 11:50 AM)
I just think he is. He showed flashes of what he could be his rookie year if he cut down on his strikeout numbers, and he did. He has power and crazy speed, he hits a ridiculous number of triples. Plus he's a highlight reel on defense. I'd be surprised if his numbers declined, or weren't something close to 2007.

 

I think Sizemore = Granderson btw

 

Granderson hit a silly # of triples- I just don't see that again. If Granderson = Sizemore, a 50 point drop in OPS is not surprising. Players have good years and great years. Beltran's .878 OPS last year is quite good, but it was a 100 point drop from the year before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 01:43 PM)
Granderson hit a silly # of triples- I just don't see that again. If Granderson = Sizemore, a 50 point drop in OPS is not surprising. Players have good years and great years. Beltran's .878 OPS last year is quite good, but it was a 100 point drop from the year before.

Ok, I'll buy that. In A-Rod's "bad" 2004, he had a .887 OPS, so many players wish they could sniff a OPS that high in their best years.

 

But, while Granderson's numbers may or may not go down, I don't think his impact/contribution to the Tigers lineup is going to necessarily be weaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(lostfan @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 12:50 PM)
I just think he is. He showed flashes of what he could be his rookie year if he cut down on his strikeout numbers, and he did. He has power and crazy speed, he hits a ridiculous number of triples. Plus he's a highlight reel on defense. I'd be surprised if his numbers declined, or weren't something close to 2007.

 

I think Sizemore = Granderson btw

 

Granderson was 6th in the AL in strikeouts last year....Not that they mean anything but he hardly cut down on them

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(LukeGofannon @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 02:05 PM)
Granderson was 6th in the AL in strikeouts last year....Not that they mean anything but he hardly cut down on them

I think I said that wrong... he went down from 174(!) to 141 which is still a lot, but what I was getting at was the fact that he needed to start making better contact, which he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(jenks45monster @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 03:38 PM)
Indians dont even come near the Tigers on paper. Theyve got the whole package. Defense, speed to an extent, veterans, veteran pitching, power, a bullpen, and a great backstop in Pudge.

Outside of Verlander, the rest of their rotation has a lot of question marks. I am not at all sold on Bonderman, who you don't know from day to day whether he is a #1 or a #5. And Todd Jones is still their closer. I'd be surprised if they didn't develop some holes on that staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(lostfan @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 02:43 PM)
Outside of Verlander, the rest of their rotation has a lot of question marks. I am not at all sold on Bonderman, who you don't know from day to day whether he is a #1 or a #5. And Todd Jones is still their closer. I'd be surprised if they didn't develop some holes on that staff.

 

Not that they are the best staff, just that they do have veterans, unlike us with 2 spots filled by very young guys in Danks and Floyd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Dec 12, 2007 -> 11:22 AM)
This was my projection. I think Jacque will split time with Thames. Considering they have plenty of power, would YOU start Jones?

 

I would most definitely start Jones in LF. He's not a bad player. He had a horrible first half last season, but put in a 2nd half of .332/.374/.458 in 238 AB. He should be good for .270/.330/.450, ~20 HR, 80 in that stacked lineup. And coming from the 9 hole, thats pretty f***ing good. Also considering he was an above average defensive RF, he should be even better in LF.

Edited by sircaffey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...