| |
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Aug 18, 2006
|
|
Sure the AL might be a bit strongerMaybe I am not understanding something properly but he states that then puts 7 NL teams in the top 10. To me that seems like the NL is stronger.
|
|
|
Reputation:98
Level:Superstar
Since:Sep 27, 2006
|
|
The NL also has six of the bottom eight teams in his ranking.
|
|
|
Reputation:91
Level:All-Star
Since:Nov 6, 2006
|
|
Maybe I am not understanding something properly but he states that then puts 7 NL teams in the top 10. To me that seems like the NL is stronger.
this is because the top NL teams are beating up on the rest of their inferior league. and i do not get how anyone can say that the NL is better anyway.
I think that the AL east may be better than the whole NL to tell you the truth
|
|
|
Reputation:76
Level:Pro
Since:Dec 20, 2007
|
|
Over the past few years, the AL has had two competitive divisions right down to the very end, and aside from last year, the NL hadn't had as competitive divisions as the AL. The AL is better.
|
|
|
Reputation:92
Level:All-Star
Since:Sep 27, 2006
|
|
I think the improvement of the NL Central has elevated the National League above or at least very close to the American League this year.
It's been a while since anyone could say that.
Watch out for the Cubs! They played excellent baseball against the Mets for the 2 game sweep, and look dangerous. I like Arizona, NYM, Philadelphia, and the Cubs in the NL playoffs.
|
|
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Aug 18, 2006
|
|
The NL teams lack balance overall. Some teams can destroy the ball, while others are only pitching without hitting. The DBacks have great pitching, crap hitting; Braves have solid hitting, horrid pitching; Marlins have monster hitting, inconsistent pitching; Mets have monster hitting, inconsistent pitching.
The AL teams are just more balanced, but of course this is just a popularity contest.
|
|
|
Reputation:49
Level:Rookie
Since:Oct 17, 2006
|
|
Yup and 5 of the top 7. Of course that doesn't fit everyone's preconceived notions so it can't be accurate. It's easy to blithely say the AL is better and to say that the AL East by itself is better than the NL is just moronic but not unexpected considering the source. I do recall a certain WS where Detroit was supposed to sweep because the NL was sooooo weak....
|
|
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Jan 17, 2008
|
|
Maybe the NL is ranked higher because they don't have sissy's who are afraid to pitch and bat. Or maybe the guys on the bench are more invovled since the NL has Pinch Hitters and Pinch Runners and Strategy while the AL has the Designated Dummy.
You would think the AL would be stronger since the Designated Dummy does not have to field a position. Now that is baseball. go up to the plate 3 or 4 times get paid a ton of money and go home.
|
|
|
Reputation:85
Level:All-Star
Since:Dec 6, 2006
|
|
That's because there are seven teams who would be average in the AL that are way above average in the NL, so they have by far the best records in the league. Besides Arizona (clearly the MLB's best) any other NL team would be .500 at best in the AL
|
|
|
Reputation:94
Level:All-Star
Since:Jul 3, 2007
|
|
The NL has come a long way as a league since a couple of years ago.
Case in point: The Mets, in 2006, were viewed as an "AL quality team" playing with easier competition. They won 9 more regular season games than the next highest seeds, the Dodgers and the Padres. The next year, they didn't make the playoffs.
The emergence of the Cubs, D'Backs and the Rockies as top teams, the revitalization of the Braves and the continued growth of the Brewers has brought the NL to a point where AL fans can't complain how much weaker the NL is than the AL, since the two leagues are comparable. And yes we have our low rung teams like the Pirates, Giants and Astros. But doesn't the AL have the Orioles, Athletics and Rangers?
|
|
