2007 a Red Sox-Mets rematch!

[JackRiddler]

The Sox will return to their tradition of losing on a grand, Shakespearean scale. Not before they beat the Yankees for the pennant.

Why the hell not?

Mets vs. Phillies (the real danger), Cards, Giants. Barry Bonds will not reach 755. I have spoken.

NOW... something to ponder as commentators babble about parity in baseball (from another thread):

The Cards deserved to win - they were six times in the playoffs out of seven years, best record in MLB the prior two years, best in NL over three years' time.

So they were off last year - they still made the tournament (barely) and then they showed that all the experience was worth something. Elite pitching, scrappy suicide play, and a great slugger even if he was not the deciding factor. You can't begrudge them the ring, given that they didn't get it although they "deserved" it the two years before.

They are one of the most radical examples of how baseball is dominated by a set of elite teams.

Braves (6) + Cards (6) + Yankees (7) = 19 out of 56 total playoff spots in the 7 years from 2000-2006. More than a third!

I think 9 teams that made the playoffs three or more times accounted for, like, 41 playoff spots out of 56. 11 teams accounted for the rest. 10 teams... did not make the playoffs at all during the last seven years.

Baseball has a clear hierarchy, partly based on money (market size), partly thanks to good strategy and organizational strength. The Rangers will always suck, the A's and Twins and Marlins will usually find ways to punch above their weight.

Nothing's stopping the Mets this year, though!

[DaveinMD]

1. I don't think so

I doubt the Mets make the postseason. Their pitching is pretty awful.

[JackRiddler]

2. Untrue!

They went through 12 starters last year and had the best record in baseball - with Steve Trachsel leading in wins, no less. I'll take Maine, Pelfrey and Perez. In the end they didn't lose to the Cards because of pitching, did they?