clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Gut Response: Are the Royals Better than the Twins?

New, 55 comments

As we continue through the AL Central, America's favorite division...

After a startling 63% of you said that the Royals were better than the Tigers, the feeling swung wildly back the other way when we turned to the Indians, with only 22% believing that the Royals are better than the Tribe. Something of a surprising figure given that the Tribe only finished six games ahead of the Royals last year.

So, as we move up the division standings, we turn to the Twins.

'07 Pythag '08 Pythag
Twins 80-82 89-74
Royals 74-88 72-90

Assuming you are mostly familiar with the major transactions of Dayton Moore, here's the info for the Twins (let me know if I miss something).

Losses: Adam Everett, Carl Pohlad

Added:

This is what the Twins do, although rarely to this extreme. Usually they make a bad trade and sign C-level free agent or two, but as far as I can tell they've really done neither just yet.

For some reason, the White Sox and Twins had good seasons last year, while the Tribe and Tigers struggled. In '07 it was reversed. Honestly, I have no idea why. The Twins operate on a very fragile platform of success, as from year to year they rely on four or five Lew Ford types in their lineup and another two in the back of the rotation. Some years, enough of those guys perform well enough, and along with the team's core of elite talent, they can win 89 games or so. (They've hit big on Mauer and Morneau, which has stabilized their entire roster and can produce #4 starters at will.) But if there's any slip, then they fail, and end up looking like they barely tried in the process. To wit, Brian Buscher is apparently the starting third baseman in 2009.

So you tell me, are the Royals better than the Twins?