Dayn Perry is either nutty or looking for publicity. The 71 win Tigers winning the division? Don't get me wrong, he's a smart guy - but can he back that projection up?
From his first power ranking of the year:
His points justifying his #11 ranking of the Tribe -
The bullpen has been thinned out.
- The bullpen has changed. I can't say the core players are better or worse (FCab and Miller in for the season), but they probably won't put up the performance they did last year. Yes, they won't be as good, but thinning is the wrong reason.
- Again, fair enough. But Millwood 2006 won't be Millwood 2005, Johnson is a slight increase over Elarton, and - somebody check my logic on this, but Millwood only won 9 games last year. Yes, this was because they scored no runs for him, so I'm not saying he's a bad pitcher - just that we needed him for all of 9 wins. Am I being dumb here? I mean it's the first time I've actually included W-L records in an argument.
Inadequate production from 3B, 1B, OF Corners
- Worse than last year? No way. Those guys won't suck quite as bad again, and Marte and Garko (polo) are a car ride away. Heck, the front office is even talking about Hafner playing first more. If Peralta, Sizemore and Martinez will regress to the mean (-), then so will Boone and Blake (+). Note how I'm not arguing for Broussard here :)
Peralta is in for a regression.
- Maybe a touch, but enough to really bring up here? Did he check Peralta's numbers by month? By LH/RH Split? Where was the indication that he didn't make a true leap forward? You know what's in for a regression? Our record as indicated by RS v RA.
Arrgh...Did I have a point here? Oh yes. Perhaps this is the wrong site for this question - but who is nuts here? Me or Dayn?