Got|Opinion?: Most Improved Team

[pennypinch]

So who's going to go from worst to first? OK, maybe no-one is, but who are the likely candidates to make big jumps? Who's in position to pull themselves up by the bootstraps?

Here're my candidates:

MLB: Oakland. OK, so it's not even like they're playing poorly. But all that talent in the starting rotation has got to come home to roost sooner or later, and they have a relatively potent top of the order. Are they going to catch Seattle? Are Jethro Tull pedophiles? Unless the boys in Jetro Tull indulge in the young 'uns, no. But I wouldn't be surprised if they made the wild card with a strong second half, and even made up some ground on them Mariners.

NFL: (tie) Chicago and San Diego. OK, so Chicago doesn't have a passer and San Diego doesn't have anyone for Flutie to throw the ball to. And both have lousy offensive lines. But they both have last place schedules! And I think St. Louis showed just how big an advantage that is. Chicago now has a trio (Robinson, Terrell, Engram) to rival any in the league, and their defense is young, aggressive, and fast. San Diego has to improve; any regression from where they already are should mean some sort of soccer-like relegation to NFL Europe or something. Butler brought in all sorts of new life on the D-line, signed two pro-level corners, and they still have Rodney Harrison and Junior Seau. Offensively, I think they got the man they wanted in LT. It's not smart to debate Butler on personnel decisions!

NBA: Call me nuts, but I could see the Nets actually getting better for once. The obvious answer would be the Clippers, but I like what the Nets did. Last year, they lacked any type of team concept. It was Marbury and 4 other non-Marbury's. They turned over most of the roster, brought in a cadre of young, athletic guys, and avoided headcase Eddie Griffin. Meanwhile, they brought in a team-first guy like Jason Kidd (despite his wife-beatin' tendencies) to pass to shooters like Keith Van Horn and Kendall Gill. If they can avoid having <B>EVERYONE</b> hurt at some point in the season, I look for them to make big strides in the Leastern Conference.

NHL: The first team that comes to mind is the Isles, but I'm not biting. Yashin has never impressed me, and Peca, while a great team guy, can't be ridden for 70 points. They have few wingers, and short on D, and have a rookie that looked totally overmatched last year in net.

Naw, I'm going with...yup, the Caps. Call me a front-runner, accuse me of picking a team that finished near the top of the Eastern Conference last year, but their big problem wasn't stopping goals; their defense-first philosophy and Ollie the Goalie saw to that. But having only Peter Bondra putting biscuits in the basket was killing them, especially in the tightly-defended playoffs. Think what you want about Jagr, but the guy can manufacture points. They've got a decent cast of complementary forwards, and their defensive corps is solid. Pencil them in for a high seed, but more importantly, push Washington a little further along the playoff bracket.

So who are you looking at with interest? Who could surprise you this year?

[Markel]

Originally posted by pennypinch

NFL: (tie) Chicago ...

Man, oh man. It would be nice. 1985 was a looooong time ago.

[jase71]

Originally posted by pennypinch

NFL: (tie) Chicago and San Diego. OK, so Chicago doesn't have a passer

Chicago? Nah... not in the NFC Central. Will they be a better team? Probably. But I don't think their record will reflect it much this year. They can't outscore the Vikings. They can't score against Tampa Bay. They can't match up against Green Bay. Detroit is their only real hope, and Detroit is always tough in the Dome.

They may collect a few more wins outside the Central... but it won't be enough to bring them respectability.

They need a stable quarterback before they're gonna make any serious gains. Sounds like they're gonna try the West Coast offense. For that they'll need a consistent qb. He doesn't have to be brilliant, just consistent. But they haven't got one of those on the roster...

[Y2J]

Originally posted by pennypinch


NBA: Call me nuts, but I could see the Nets actually getting better for once. The obvious answer would be the Clippers


This is the first time Ive heard someone besides myself say this in 10 years

[pennypinch]

Originally posted by jase71

Originally posted by pennypinch

NFL: (tie) Chicago and San Diego. OK, so Chicago doesn't have a passer

Chicago? Nah... not in the NFC Central. Will they be a better team? Probably. But I don't think their record will reflect it much this year. They can't outscore the Vikings. They can't score against Tampa Bay. They can't match up against Green Bay. Detroit is their only real hope, and Detroit is always tough in the Dome.

They may collect a few more wins outside the Central... but it won't be enough to bring them respectability.

They need a stable quarterback before they're gonna make any serious gains. Sounds like they're gonna try the West Coast offense. For that they'll need a consistent qb. He doesn't have to be brilliant, just consistent. But they haven't got one of those on the roster...



If they can get decent running from Allen and Thomas, and their defense overachieves, I don't doubt they could take two from the Pack and Lions each. The Lions didn't do anything significant in the offseason, not good news for a team that finished next to last in the conference last year. The Pack's core is aging, it's young players are stagnating, and are mediocre on the road.

As for unspectacular, Jim Miller is, if nothing else, accurate. He has no arm strength, but he can dink and dunk slants and crossing routes. Not a great combination with three deep talents like they have, but all three run good routes and are big and tough enough to come across the middle. I honestly think he'll be the guy to come out of that QB battle.

As Lester Bangs might say, here's something for you call to totaly disregard: Cincinatti will ambush a few good teams. Their O-line is decent, they've got a lot of talent at the ends now, and they have an intruiging set of receivers now. Darnay Scott is back this year; it remains to see how well his leg holds up. Chad Johnson was supposed to be a top-10 pick. Peter Warrick was manhandled all year by double teams last season. And they have one of the top three backs in the league.

Anyone wanna whack that softball?

[Chek]

I would have to say you might be wrong about Peca and Yashin, penny. Peca isn't the most fantastic scorer but what he is is a leader. He's the guy in the locker room that the Sens wanted Yashin to be. I think now that Yashin won't have to worry about being a team leader and can just concentrate on being good he will flourish.

[jase71]

The defense might be the bright spot for the Bears. With Urlacher hanging around back there, and the Washington and Traylor pick ups on the d-line, they'll be better than they were.

Allen is a good back, but he's not going to make anybody quake in fear. Thomas is more of an unknown. Guess I'm skeptical about rookies. Not a lot make a huge difference the first year. Those two might be a bigger threat if the Bears could pick up a passing game to take the pressure off the backs. But they can't carry it on their own.

Miller might be the only hope for the Bears at QB. The good crew of receivers is worthless without a decent QB. But do you really think Miller is going to be starting over McNown? And what does Leaf-lite do to the locker room if he's NOT starting? Jauron's fighting for his job this year... which risk does he take? I'd have more enthusiasm for the Bears if I thought Miller would be under center for all 16 games. I just don't think he will...

I think they'll lose two to Minnesota and Tampa Bay, and they'll split with GB and Detroit. And I think they'll lose two to GB if Freeman actually plays, or Levens turns out to really be healthy. I just don't expect either of those to happen, so they'll likely split. GB is a tough team to judge this year. Lots of injuries healing. They could come back, or fall apart. On talent alone the Bears should beat Detroit twice, but Detroit in the dome is just a tough team to beat, no matter how bad they are otherwise.

I'd agree with you on Cincy, though. A happy Dillon behind that line is gonna be something to fear for a lot of defenses. They may not stop anyone, or be able to pass, but they'll wear some teams down and get some wins that way.

[Edited by jase71 on 07-16-2001 at 01:49 PM]

[pennypinch]

Leaf-lite. That's brilliant!

I think they will go with Miller. The city hates McNown, so the talk shows'll be behind Jauron if he sits him. He doesn't prepare, he's impatient, and he's innaccurate.

I don't think Allen's anything special either, but with a good change of pace back like A-Train (who's got way too many carries on those legs to be in the league more than 5 years), I think they could do a kind of Thunder and Lightening thing. I think the running should be the least of the Bears' problems.

RE: the Lions. I think this is a year for Millen to assess what he junks. If they don't do anything this year, I think he cuts bait and starts again. I like Matt Millen a lot, I think he'll do a good job, just not this year. I say at least a win there, maybe two. GB, the Bears always play tough in Lambeau. My Vikes couldn't stop a car with a red octagonal sign right now, and I'm skeptical about Bennett but, again, I can't really argue with Green's offensive drafting record. Pencil the Purple in for two wins, they always beat the bears. TB has a propensity to shoot itself in the foot against easy teams, a win would be a steal there. That puts them, at worst, 2-6 in the Central. But you look at the rest of their schedule: Jacksonville, Atlanta, Arizona, SF, a bad Jacksonville team? I give them a fighting chance in all of 'em.

[Hrudey]

Originally posted by Y2J

Originally posted by pennypinch


NBA: Call me nuts, but I could see the Nets actually getting better for once. The obvious answer would be the Clippers


This is the first time Ive heard someone besides myself say this in 10 years

obvious pick would be clippers? man I must be reading incorrectly..

NHL: kings are goin far this year. We lost robataille, but i dont think the kings will miss his lazy, no-defense ass.
kings all the way baby!!!

[pennypinch]

The Kings? They haven't done a thing the entire offseason! Not that that's bad, but they also went and lost their best left winger. He generated a hell of a lot of offense, and especially with Blake gone, they need someone to put the puck in the net. I don't see anyone on that current roster that can do it regularly except for Palfy, and the Caps last year showed what a one-trick pony does in the playoffs.

[jase71]

Originally posted by pennypinch
My Vikes couldn't stop a car with a red octagonal sign right now, and I'm skeptical about Bennett but, again, I can't really argue with Green's offensive drafting record.

A Vikes fan? Oh, man, I'm sorry. There's gotta be a 12 step program or something that can help... :)

I've been a Packers fan since I was old enough be tackling fodder for the older neighborhood kids...

Geez, just when I was starting to like ya, you have to go and admit to being a Vikes fan... :D

[attgig]

always rooted for the underdogs in nba...
i'm all for the nets, clips, nuggets, and grizzlies...

mlb...gotta stay loyal..mets =P
nfl...cardinals...i'm still a huge jake plummer fan.
nhl...staying loyal...isles

[pennypinch]

Originally posted by jase71

Originally posted by pennypinch
My Vikes couldn't stop a car with a red octagonal sign right now, and I'm skeptical about Bennett but, again, I can't really argue with Green's offensive drafting record.

A Vikes fan? Oh, man, I'm sorry. There's gotta be a 12 step program or something that can help... :)

I've been a Packers fan since I was old enough be tackling fodder for the older neighborhood kids...

Geez, just when I was starting to like ya, you have to go and admit to being a Vikes fan... :D

Now, now, don't get all testy. Just 'cuz Randy's burned you guys for how many touchdowns in the last two years? Just because you wasted an ENTIRE DRAFT trying to stop him, no need to call names! I'm sure you're excited about your backfield of retreads and IR fodder, and your receiving corps is also something to jump about :rolleyes:.

I'm sure your prediliction will ebb away once you leave prison, but till then, may we jab at each other, in a decidedly non shiv-like way, over the Pack-Vikes. Even though the Pack suck mah balls.

[Jihforce]

Originally posted by pennypinch
The Kings? They haven't done a thing the entire offseason! Not that that's bad, but they also went and lost their best left winger. He generated a hell of a lot of offense, and especially with Blake gone, they need someone to put the puck in the net. I don't see anyone on that current roster that can do it regularly except for Palfy, and the Caps last year showed what a one-trick pony does in the playoffs.

Note who you responded to (Hrudey). I think he's still stuck in the old days when the Kings used to be a contender.
Nothing against the Kings, but sitting around and waiting for all the top notch free agents to be signed isn't exactly a "smart" thing considering the NHL has no salary-cap (refer to Colorado). When you don't have a cap, and the owner wants to really win, you go out and get yourself the best in the business. Palffy can't do it alone. And Felix is probably going to end up being all hype. As for the Caps, I think they did a great job going for Jagr...even if there is no guarantee that he'll resign after his 2 years are up. I still like my Caps as one of the favorites to make it to the finals next year.

NBA: The Nets do look very hopeful...and the Clips definitively have a nice roster forming. However I don't expect much from Olowakandi. Lets just hope his lazyness isn't contagious. Now, the team I think has some HUGE upside has got to be the Magic. I don't think much of Ewing, or HoGrant. But they are solid contributors even at their age...Ewing now will still be more of a contributor than Kandiman ever will. Overall, TMac and Hill will be the stars of the team, while Ewing, HoGrant and the rest are fairly solid compliments to the team.

[pennypinch]

If Kandi's only job is to board and block shots, he's actually quite useful. Now that Brand is on board to take care of the low post scoring, he's not going to be counted on to do that.

Man, you think what the Clips could have been like with Odom, Carter/Jamison, and Brand? YIKES!!!! 'Course, how likely would they have been to get Odom after a year with Carter, and especially how likely were they to land the #2 pick, but it's always nice to dream.

I don't think spending correllates to winning in hockey as well as it does to, say, basketball. Look at the Rangers.

[jase71]

Originally posted by pennypinch

Now, now, don't get all testy. Just 'cuz Randy's burned you guys for how many touchdowns in the last two years? Just because you wasted an ENTIRE DRAFT trying to stop him, no need to call names!

Apparently Randy's burned us for just slightly too few touchdowns lately, 'cause the Pack swept the San Antonio/Minnesota Vikes last year with those retreads and IR fodder... :D

Of course, I'm sure the complete lack of defense and the loss of Robert Smith will have you back on top this year!

[/B][/QUOTE]
I'm sure your prediliction will ebb away once you leave prison, but till then, may we jab at each other, in a decidedly non shiv-like way, over the Pack-Vikes. Even though the Pack suck mah balls. [/B][/QUOTE]

Ah well, we'll probably have plenty of time to poke at each other while we're watching Randy Moss play in the NBA, and the Packer's D-line do their imitation of a subway turnstile at rush hour.

Do ya suppose this will be one of the years everyone in Minnesota is a Vikings fan, or one of the years no one shows up at the Dome? Seems like it's always one extreme or the other over there...



[Edited by jase71 on 07-17-2001 at 12:27 PM]

[pennypinch]

In all seriousness, I think they're set for yet another 9-7 season. 'Course, every time I think that, three guys turn into stars, the team goes 15-1 or 14-2, and exits stage right in the NFC championship.

And I wouldn't call that game in GB last year a "win". You wanna talk about the greatest fluke of all time, not only does Berger get a lousy snap, but catching a ball that bounces off a guy's back? PLEASE! If you have to resort to freak plays to win, you can take 'em! :D

[jase71]

The Vikes have the offense, even without Smith, to be a serious contender. Bennett only has to be mediocre. Culpepper is mobile enough to offset the loss of Smith a little.

Their defense is gonna be what makes or breaks them. If they step up, it could be 12-4 for the Vikes. If they don't, I think you're right at 9-7, maybe even 8-8.

The Pack is tougher to judge. They'll likely be an 7-9 or 8-8 team. If a few people come back to pre-injured form, like Levens, and if Gilbert actually can sub for some snaps to plug up the center, and if Freeman actually plays like he's paid to, they could contend for the Central. Unfortunately, I don't think that's likely. Levens and Freeman are on the decline, and I don't see any reason why Brown would return to 1996 form...

As for the win last year, I think turnabout is fair play. I recall a couple of flukey wins by the Vikes over the last 5 or 6 years. Not THAT flukey, but enough to make you scratch your head. A certain unwise pass by TJ Rubley a few years ago blew a game for the Pack, and I recall a Vikes win with a receiver all alone downfield, uncovered. Was that Hatchette? I don't remember...
At least Freeman had a guy covering him when he made the "catch", and one who could have tackled him if the defender hadn't been getting an early start for the showers!

Should be an interesting year, though. There's a lot up in the air...

[Jihforce]

Originally posted by pennypinch
I don't think spending correllates to winning in hockey as well as it does to, say, basketball. Look at the Rangers. [/B]
Or look at the Avs...granted having a good GM to make good decisions is important, but money still plays a big part in retaining talent.

As for spending correllating to bball more, i don't think so. MY, Miami and Portand are way over the cap yet they suck like there's no tomorrow.

[pennypinch]

Hey, I'm not trying to say that spending doesn't bring in a good team. The NHL is rapidly turning into a league of haves and have-nots. But just going out willy-nilly and signing somebody because they're out there does not a winner make. I mean, the Rangers are famous for bringing in high-price talent, only for it to "underachieve", which is to say play exactly the way they'd played before, just not well enough to justify the enormous contract they'd signed.

The guys out there: who was there? Peca? Not a goal scorer. Yashin woulda cost them too much in prospects, something LA's already light on. Roenick, one of my favorite players, isn't a guy you can count on for 82 games a season. They would have had to overpay to get Sacik, Roy, or Blake to get them out of Colorado.

The money saved on Robataille can be used to add more depth. Let's face it, while the stars helped, Colorado's incredible depth was what won them the cup. Three full lines of good players will ALWAYS beat one line of incredible, which is pretty much what the Kings were last year.