MLB 11 The Show - Overall Team Rankings

[ronzie]

Sorry, they finished 6 games ahead of Chicago... Detroit was 13 games back. Go Detroit, I'm sure your ranking is well deserved... *sarcasm implied*

[Jdurg]

Quote: Originally Posted by ronzie

Sorry, they finished 6 games ahead of Chicago... Detroit was 13 games back. Go Detroit, I'm sure your ranking is well deserved... *sarcasm implied*

Last year's standings mean absolutely NOTHING with regards to this years rankings. If you always went by the previous year's standings to determine this year's rankings, then if this game existed in 1998 the Marlins would be the #1 team.

They determine current rankings based on the average player performances over the previous three years in order to remove any "One year amazing performance that is far out of line with regards to typical performance" type players, to also remove the opposite of that where an odd "off-year" takes place, and to also remove the variability of injuries and whatnot. (Since if a team suffers a lot of injuries in a year, it will affect their standings from the previous year but does not affect their potential to a great degree).

Also, the rosters of a team from last year means nothing when determining rankings this year. The rankings from the current year depend on the age of the players, the stats of the players from the prior three seasons in MLB, the ratings of the players within the game itself, and probably a bit on the future potential of the players.

Whatever a team did last year means nothing. Once you can understand that and get rid of the bias that is inherent in everyone's opinions (and yes, everything regarding a team rating or overall ranking is opinion and not fact) then you can understand it a bit more. Do I think the Yankees deserve to be #2? No, not with their starting pitching staff. But with the players they have in their bullpen and in their offense and the most likely potential for them to perform well this year, I can kind of understand it. Personally, I think the Phillies' pitching staff is the best in baseball.

[ronzie]

I know how they do the rankings. That's why I am upset. We didn't lose anyone worth mentioning and we had some players improve from previous years plus we added Nishioka, who is a great infielder and a good hitter. The Twins have been consistent the past few years so your argument regarding this is in my opinion is invalid.

[jd369]

Quote: Originally Posted by B-Man1985

Ummm...even with ALL the injuries the Phillies had to deal with they still won 97 games last year...most in babseball...Yea they lost Werth who batted a whopping 0.157 with runners in scoring position and 0.333 with no one on base so they lose some home runs but it's not like they are going to need to score over 5 runs to win most of the time anyway...Phils have 4 pitchers that will go atleast 7 which leaves two good setup men in Contreras and Madson in the 8th with a spotty closer in Lidge. Red Sox bullpen is horrible and they didn't upgrade...Yankees have 1 ace...1....forget about their bullpen which will be coming out in the 4th most of the time... Giants were a product of what the Phillies were in 2008. Everything that needed to go their way to win the WS did. Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.

This post is hilarious! Ill give you that Doc and Lee will make it 7 most games, but you are seriously over valuing oswalt who averaged 6.6 innings last year and hamels who was one game over .500 and avereaged 6.3 innings. yeah those 2 are gonna go 7 almost every game. and you think anyone in the league is scared of conteras and madson? ROFL!

[jd369]

Quote: Originally Posted by ronzie

I know how they do the rankings. That's why I am upset. We didn't lose anyone worth mentioning and we had some players improve from previous years plus we added Nishioka, who is a great infielder and a good hitter. The Twins have been consistent the past few years so your argument regarding this is in my opinion is invalid.

I was surprised the twins were that low as well, but I dont know their whole roster. since it is solely based on cumulative ratings of players it could be they have some lower rated bench/bullpen guys that brought down their rating.

[Dog]

Quote: Originally Posted by jd369

This post is hilarious! Ill give you that Doc and Lee will make it 7 most games, but you are seriously over valuing oswalt who averaged 6.6 innings last year and hamels who was one game over .500 and avereaged 6.3 innings. yeah those 2 are gonna go 7 almost every game. and you think anyone in the league is scared of conteras and madson? ROFL!

Contreras no, Madson yes.

Also, If you are really taking into account Hamels record, the whole post is irrelevant. Felix Hernandez was "one game over .500" too..

[jd369]

Quote: Originally Posted by JNes12

Contreras no, Madson yes. Also, If you are really taking into account Hamels record, the whole post is irrelevant. Felix Hernandez was "one game over .500" too..

felix hernandex plays for the sucky mariners, not the "juggernaut all mighty" philadelphia phillies! and I guess Im not scared of madson cause I usually only see him when he plays the braves. his 6 something ERA against last year isnt all that imposing.

[Dogslax41]

Quote: Originally Posted by juicer420

After reading through this thread, it seems to me that the people calling the Giants "over-rated" are fans of the Phillies and Braves or have Socal or LAX in their name. Hmmmm....

It seems like the only ones saying they are not are Giants fans.

I havent seen anyone saying the Giants aren't a good team but I think anyone other than Giants fans and probably even some Giants fans would agree that when ranked on pure talent (which these rankings represent) and not taking into account the intangible "magic" that a team may have or not have from season to season the Giants would not be a top 3 team this year or even honestly at the end of last year despite winning it all.