So Kruk was on Mike and Mike this morning and said the top three teams in the AL are...

1. Red Sox
2. Angels
3. Yankees

Not only that, but he said their is a very big gap between the Angels and Yankees.

The day that I listen to anything that Kruk says is the day that...hell, I can't even come up with a scenario in which I would listen to Kruk. I don't understand how people are picking NY to do well at all.

If I wanna hear about the best training tables in the league or how it felt like to have WIld Thing emulsify one of your balls with a pickoff throw, I go with Kruk. Otherwise, I'll take someone else. I like Kruk, but only as a schtick guy.

The Angels

The good:: Great #1. #2, and #3 starters

The Who knows: Good but aged outfield... The youngster is 32. The good 1B is coming off a bad injury. Who's closing?

The bad: They don't have a 3b, a C, and their 2B regressed badly.

IF the who knows work out okay and their weak positions improve, yeah tyhey're good, but a lot of big ifs.

Every time I think of John Kruk, I remember the time I saw his two lesbian clones dancing together in Denton. And then my mind explodes.

This is a great line Pull T "or how it felt like to have WIld Thing emulsify one of your balls with a pickoff throw, I go with Kruk."

meh, if they all say the same thing it gets boring. Someone has to go against the grain. I think the West will be pretty tight and we will need to get a big arm at the deadline to win in the end. Or we could finish 10 back. Who knows???

Watching ESPN and expecting an honest and balanced national sports assessment is like expecting the NYTimes to provide honest and balanced political assessment.

That's funny. I think most people would have Minnesota, New York, Detroit, Oakland, Tampa Bay, and Texas above the Angels. Did he give any reason for this great proclamation, or was he just throwing it out there?

What a complete joke. Kruk, who is employed by ESPN, only covers big-market teams, and seemingly has a biased take on them as well. How can you properly cover the news, although it is sports, with a biased view on certain teams? We all know the Yankees are old and on the decline, the Angels are overpaid and aging. The only teams deserving mention in the top three of the American League are the Red Sox, Rangers, and possibly the Twins or Yankees. The Angels may shock the world and make the playoffs, but like I said, it would "shock the world"....it shouldn't be a projection by an overweight "baseball analyist" who supports all of the large-market teams.

If Tampa can pull an effective bullpen together, they will surprise many people. If they do, I would put them easily above the Angels and probably above the Yankees.

I'd sooner go to John Kruk for diet tips than baseball picks.

Anyone that covers "the big market teams" would have to include the Rangers in that. Explain again, why Texas is considered anything but a big market?

Texas plays in the Dallas/Fort Worth market which is #5. The only ones larger are New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia.

I think they didn't feel like they had to talk about us because we sucked so bad for so damn long. Then it just got to be a habit.

Kruk was the only guy in 2010 that picked the Rangers in ALCS.
When you look at our Staff, the names don't actually explode at you.
We're going to be the underdog, with a bullseye on the back, for 2011.