Philadelphia Phillies and Eagles: Which Has the Greater Need?
We know that the Phillies need pitching help. We know that the Eagles need help at wide receiver.
Which is the more pressing need?
Looking at the makeup of the teams, it would seem the Phillies are in more dire need.
Despite not having a true No. 1 receiver, the Eagles still have a top-flight quarterback (McNabb, when healthy) and a dynamic running back (Westbrook).
If the receivers can’t get open, just have McNabb put the ball in Westbrook’s hands for a big play. Westbrook can beat you with his legs and his hands.
If the offense is struggling, the defense can carry the team. Cole, Patterson, Gaither, Sheppard, Samuel, and Dawkins are all leaders and stars at their respective positions. Defense wins championships.
The Eagles have shown in the past that they can win without a No. 1 receiver. Remember when Pinkston and Thrash were the go-to guys. And during the Eagles' run to the Super Bowl, the playoff games were won with Fred-Ex being the main target.
The Phillies' starting rotation has four starters with ERAs over four, and two of the four carrying an ERA over five. After Hamels, there are no pitchers that bring consistency from start to start.
The offensive firepower of Rollins, Utley, Howard, and Burrell can carry the Phillies to a division title. But in the playoffs, pitching is what gets a team to the next round.
Look at last year’s playoff series loss to the Rockies. The offense was non-existent, and the Phillies were swept in three games. The Phillies' pitching could not carry the team.
A more recent example is the back-to-back series losses to the Red Sox and Angels. The opposition boasted star pitching, the Phillies offense slumped, and the Phillies pitching could not counter.
The Phillies need another top-line pitcher to make an extended playoff run this year. Their need is much greater than the Eagles'.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?