ILX Yahoo! Fantasy Baseball League 2003 -- Part 2 . . .

Have you seen my lineup lately? We are all such homers. I want to claim Darren Baker off waivers.

Couple of things: Yes, Aurilia was great in 2001 (I had him on my team in my other league and I couldn't BELIEVE my luck), but gygax are you familiar with the concept of "career year"? See Jay Bell in 1999 and Todd Hundley in 1996. Anyway, Aurilia may very well have a kick-ass year, but the point is you could have drafted him much lower.

All you people picking the Twins (Tep = "I don't think there's a real contest there") are fucking nuts. Yes, I'm a White Sox homer, but you're out of your mind if you think they'll repeat the magical season they had last year. Everything went their way. No big deal, that's baseball; but it's unrealistic to expect it to happen again. Just ask the Mariners. The ChiSox are ready to rock; with Colon in the fold they are clearly the team to beat in the central.

and was there a more nineties team than the 1993 phillies? i mean, john kruk really!

though a yankees-phillies world series would be serious dual-loyalties time fer me.

Yeah, but the Mariners still had a great season last year -- one of the best seasons since the introduction of the wildcard of any team that didn't make the playoffs (better than many that did make the playoffs in other years, in other words). It's just that the other teams had better seasons.

I don't see that happening in the AL Central. The Tigers and Royals are out of the running, obviously. The Indians are rebuilding, and they're not done yet. The White Sox aren't chopped liver, and the improvement to their pitching may make them more of a threat than I think -- but the Twins have everything going for them that they had last year. Unlike most surprise-victory teams, they haven't lost their stars to free agency, no one seems to have become a primadonna overnight, and they got enough of a payroll increase that they didn't have to sacrifice lesser-name players in order to keep the big guns under contract.

and was there a more nineties team than the 1993 phillies?

I always saw them as an 80's team! Which was the attraction! Really really wanted them to win. Jim Fregosi was awesome.

come to think of it, the 1983 phillies were the ultimate seventies team, only ten years after the fact. they were basically the seventies reds, only in phillies uniforms for a year. the "wheeze kids" was their nickname, in fact!

god, this is taking me back ...

"We haven't seen looting like this since the Detroit Tigers made the playoffs two centuries ago."

Oh, and in regards to Gygax's Aurilia defense above... snicker

I really don't get this reference.

Hey Yanc3y, can I get in on the softball action?

So here's why no one will win the World Series this year:

Why the Yankees can't win it:

Despite their high-profile arms, the Yankees just don't have the starting pitching to dominate the regular season or to take a playoff series. Wells and Clemens are in the twilights of their careers (and look for the Rocket to start mailing it in once he hits 300 wins) and Petitte still can't knock the injury bug. That leaves Mussina to be his usual solid self and either Weaver or Contreras to step up. I don't think that they will. Obviously the hitting is there in spades, but just look at what happened to them against the Angels last year.

Why the Red Sox can't win it:

Who can pitch beyond Lowe and Pedro? Casey Fossum??? Please! (yes I know he's on my team. Shhh!) Their lineup is obviously insanely potent, but the chances that the big bats remains healthy all year are slim to none. Also, the closer-by-committee approach will be a tremendous failure.

Why the Twins can't win it:

Their starting pitching is lackluster at best. Radke will be lucky to play half the season, and we already know that Milton won't. Santana's a stud, but he's gonna be a long reliever to make room for Kenny Rogers??? Bad move. Their lineup has a lot of holes (that infield is great defensively, but terrible offensively), and there's no way Once in a Lifetime Eddie Guardado repeats last year.

Why the White Sox can't win it:

Paul Konerko shows the Sox's troubles in a nutshell: inconsistency. Aside from Ordonez, the Sox are way too streaky, and I don't think the addition of Colon (an extremely overrated pitcher -- his WHIP ain't all that at all) will fix that. Sure, the youngsters (Crede, Borchard, etc) give hope, but they're not there yet. Plus, I'm not at all convinced that their 3rd, 4th or 5th starters can win 10 games, much less the 12 to 15 needed to take the AL Central (the weakest division in baseball, of course).

Why the A's can't win it:

Can they score runs??? Sure, you've got Tejada and Chavez, but other than that it's a lineup of question marks. Can Durazo stay healthy? It's a big if. Can Dye return to form? Who knows. Of course, with that rotation (which features 2003's breakout player, Mr. Ted Lilly) they only need 2 or 3 runs a game. And Foulke in the bullpen is a huge step up over Billy Koch. But still, when Chris Singleton's getting major playing time on your squad, you've got problems.

Why the Angels can't win it:

Lightning only strikes once.

Why the Mariners can't win it:

They've let this team age in hopes of returning to their amazing form from two years ago. It ain't happening. Edgar will get his hits, but who knows if he can make it to first. Mike Cameron? He gives Greg Vaughn a run for Worst Hitter in Baseball. Ichiro's amazing of course, and, if Boone's back on the needle, he'll be great too. They'll score runs (is John Olerud ageless or what?), but they'll give up a lot too. Freddy Garcia's on a slow Ankiel-like implosion and Piniero will be God-like, but not yet.

I'll do the NL later. I have work to do...

Why the Braves can't win it:

This appears to be Atlanta's weakest squad of the past decade. Maybe Leo Mazzone's running an orphanage for wayward starting pitchers, cuz that's what their rotation looks like this year -- Mike Hampton? No way will he do anything this season. Look for maybe two or three good starts in a row to get the baseball scribes' pens twirling, but nothing more than that. Paul Byrd blows. I don't care how many wins he got in KC. And hitting-wise, they appear weak as well. Sheff is coming off a down year, Furcal still hasn't recovered from the injury, Chipper seems less potent and now they'll be playing the terminally overrated hitter Robert Fick (he's a better puncher than a batter...). But they'll win the NL East cuz they've got experience, and cuz Andruw Jones will finally fulfill his promise. But they don't get past the first round of the playoffs.

Why the Phillies can't win it:

It's turned into a fucking mantra already, but once again pitching will hold the Phillies back. Yes, Millwood's solid and Randy Wolf has shown some brilliant flashes, but beyond that you're looking at a lot of 4.50-plus ERAs. Padilla really blew last year after the All Star break, Brett Myers isn't ready to pitch games in a penant race and Brandon Duckworth will spend his career as a perennial 5th starter fighting for a job. Their lineup of batters could be the best in the majors, and while Thome won't repeat last season, he will, at the very least, make those around him better. So yes, Pat the Bat Burrell will shine, as will Abreau, Rollins and even Lieberthal. But those starting arms (not to mention that their bullpen blows -- JOSE MESA??!?!) will fade down the stretch, and they'll miss the playoffs by about six games.

Why the Cardinals can't win it:

Allow me to repeat myself again: The Cards are essentially the Phillies with slightly better pitching. The problem is that "slightly." Yeah, Matt Morris fuXing roXors, but beyond that you're getting into guys like Woody Williams -- who can be brilliant, but the injury bug crawled up his ass the 95 years or so ago that he was born. Brett Tomko could have a very good season with the Cards as well. The bullpen's suspect, as Izzy's got the injury problems and even when he's healthy he's a Top 10 closer at best. But those hitters will win them a lot of games, cancelling out the many errors their pitchers will assuredly make. But what happens if Pujols or Rolen go cold in the postseason? They're goners if that happens.

Why the Astros Can't Win it:

They've got superstars in the bullpen and superstars on the field, but they're support guys are kinda weak. But still, on paper, this would appear to be the best team in the NL. Berkman-Bagwell-Kent-Oswald-Miller-Dotel-Wagner. But beyond that they're pretty thin. The young guys like Lane and Saarloos (or however you spell that fucker's name) could end up playing big roles if they're brittle bones start to snap (which is a certainty), but relying on rookies during a playoff run is not advisable. Look for injuries to doom them.

Why the Cubs can't win it:

So here's what's confused me about all those preseason predictions showing the Cubs in the playoffs: HOW THE FUCK WILL THEY SCORE RUNS??? Yeah, Sammy's good for 130 RBI, but beyond that, who can hit? Alou, sure, if he can get out of the wheelchair. Mark Bellhorn? Gimme a break. Choi? Supposedly he's a stud, but so few rookies really break out in the big leagues. Patterson? The quintessential Cubbie: Always disappointing. Their pitching looks great, and I think that Clement might be their real No. 1 pitcher. I'm still worried that Prior will have injury problems given the amount of use his arm will be given (Kerry Wood and AJ Burnett to the doctor's office please...), but when he's on the mound he'll be solid. I really like their bullpen -- getting Remlinger was a smart move, even if Alfonseca couldn't save an important game even if he had 19 fingers. They'll contend, but they don't have the bats to pass the 'Stros or Cards.

Why the DBacks can't win it:

So we're all 'sposed to believe that Elmer fucking Dessens is that elusive third ace the D'Backs have always wanted. Whatever, Gammons. Of course Randy Schilling is worth a good 50 wins, so already they're the NL West faves. BYK should be interesting -- everyone's thinking the new Lowe, but I'm thinking the new Chan Ho-Park. Flashes of brilliance but that's it. As far as hitting's concerned, they've got jackshit. Spivey will return to the .280 plateau where he belongs, and if LoGo starts shooting roids again maybe they can score. But otherwise, this is one boring ass lineup.

Why the Giants can't win it all:

They look a lot better on paper this year than they did last, that's for sure. Durham and Jose Cruz Jr are both big additions that could account for 100 more runs this season. They're bullpen looks rock solid, one of the best in baseball. But their starting pitching is rough. Can Jason Schmidt win a game on the road? Alou will have to do some serious tweaking to keep him pitching at home during a playoff series. But Alou can rest easy -- they'll miss the playoffs by a hair. Reuter will win 15 games and Moss 13, but Bonds' big bat just won't be enough to carry them.

Why the Dodgers can't win it all:

Rupert Murdoch needs to buy himself a milk factory, cuz this is one unhealthy team. But this spring supposedly things are back in order and Brown and Dreifort are looking sharp. If this is true (and these things never are) look for the Dodgers to get off to a torid pace. Shawn Green's the most uncelebrated player in baseball (prolly cuz he's so fucking dull), but he's a great hitter. Their lineup isn't anywhere near scary, but I really think that the Crime Dog could be a difference maker. Veteran power bats are hard to come by, and I think that he'll pay off. Still, it'll be the injuries that doom them.

Whoops, just caught stealing though..

Technical question: will the roster changes I made today not show up 'til tomorrow?

2003 is clearly the year of the Orioles.

Hooray, ChicksDigKs is in sole ownership of 9th place with 151.5 points. Who knew stats could be so exciting? Go, Nomo, beat the tar out of old man Johnson tonight :P

Diamond -- you have CP, no?

Now accepting trade offers for the future '03 MVP.

That's quite a vote of confidence there for your "bench," Diamond.

I am really going to enjoy Baseball Tonight this evening.

ILX Yahoo! Fantasy Baseball League 2003 -- Part 3: Still going . . .