Wishful thinking. The Yankees and Red Sox are every bit as good as the Angels and Rangers. This "What have you given me to write about lately?" team-evaluation strategy is... misguided. Oh well; it's still not as stupid as 30/190 pitchers.

I kind of like the idea of the Yanks as scrappy underdogs, but I'd be glad to trade it for either Darvish or Wilson.

If both the Red Sox and Yankees miss the postseason, those apocalyptics may well be right -- 2012 could indeed be the end of the world. (Well, it will seem that way at Fox and Turner Broadcasting.)

No worries. There's got to be something buried in the MLB small print, like in the official voting rules for shows like "American Idol" where the producers can overrule a result whenever necessary.

I'm not convinced of either the Rangers or Angels invincibility.

Angels: still have holes at 3B and C (though better than last year by definition), still have Wells, still have Abreu and Hunter on the edge of the cliff. The rotation is pretty killer but the bullpen looks pretty ordinary. Good team but not spectacular. (They will now go on to win 114 games)

I make the Rangers the favorite in the West but don't see them as a juggernaut either. They had big years from Beltre, Young and especially Napoli. A promising rotation but you can't expect anybody to step in and pitch anywhere near as well as Wilson did in 2011. Feliz to the rotation, Nathan a question mark and I think they lost Oliver so the bullpen's in flux too.

And the Tigers? Better than Sox/Yanks?* Are you kidding me? Granted, if Alex Avila puts up a 143 OPS+ again, there's some chance of that. They have issues at 2B, 3B, LF, CF, RF.** I think VMart is a real question although more for 2013 than 2012 (when he should be around average I'd guess). The rotation is nothing after Verlander and Fister (surprisingly good peripherals). The bullpen does look pretty good.

I am surprised neither the Yanks or Red Sox have taken steps to improve, especially in the rotation.

* I might believe the Tigers have a better chance at the playoffs than the Sox/Yanks due to the weakness of the AL Central but they're not a better team.

** Chances are pretty good that at least one of Young, Boesch, Jackson will have a good year and you might as well keep playing Jackson regardless so they're really looking for just one OF I think.

There's just not a dominant team in the AL at this point. The Yankees, Red Sox, Rays, Tigers, Angels, and Rangers are all looking good and have plenty of upside but are also easy to point out weaknesses for. The Tigers, as Walt points out, are the riskiest. They were a stars and scrubs team in 2011 and while it should be safe to count on Verlander, Cabrera, and Avila as major contributors next season it's unlikely that any of them will match their 2012 production, they really need more players stepping up to fill in the gaps. Guaranteeing Delmon Young approximately $6 million (and the playing time that was with that kind of commitment) isn't exactly a roaring start either.

This is ridiculous. Tha Yankees and Red Sox are still better than the Angels and the Rangers probably are too. Not by as much as last year, but they're still better on paper.