Who's the NL Central Favorite as of Today?
by DGU on Dec 17, 2009 2:26 PM CST
Email
Print
The debate at BCB right now is whether the Cubs have a chance at the NL Central, or should fold on 2010 and begin the rebuild. To argue that we should fold and rebuild means that you assume we don't have a shot at 2010. Rather than just trying to eyeball the divisions, I wanted to take a systematic look based on statistical projections. Bill James' projections aren't my favorite, but fangraphs have them for everyone to see. So, in the chart below, I have the hitters scored by runs created per 27 outs and the pitchers scored by ERA. If that stat's a little foreign to you, go to fangraphs.com to see more traditional stats for each of these players projected.
Three of the players in the chart below are not projected by Bill James and I substituted CHONE projections - Manzella, Freese, and Mather.
And you certainly don't have to tell me that this is not the best way to do this, nor very precise, etc. If this fanpost encourages someone to do it better, I'll be as glad as anyone. I'd also be interested in seeing the results by CHONE, etc.
| Player Names | Position | CHC | STL | MIL | HOU | CIN |
| Soto/Molina/Zaun/Quintero/Hernandez | C | 6.05 | 4.49 | 4.19 | 3.40 | 4.51 |
| Lee/Pujols/Fielder/Berkman/Votto | 1B | 7.05 | 10.77 | 7.96 | 7.46 | 8.10 |
| Fontenot/Lugo/Weeks/Matsui/Phillips | 2B | 5.04 | 4.10 | 5.44 | 4.22 | 4.85 |
| Theriot/Ryan/Escobar/Manzella/Janish | SS | 4.44 | 3.92 | 4.49 | 3.51 | 3.01 |
| Ramirez/Freese/McGehee/Feliz/Rolen | 3B | 6.66 | 5.06 | 5.01 | 4.13 | 5.48 |
| Soriano/Schumaker/Braun/Lee/Balentien | LF | 5.33 | 5.04 | 8.22 | 6.34 | 4.69 |
| Colvin/Rasmus/Gomez/Bourn/Taveras | CF | 4.47 | 4.76 | 3.91 | 4.57 | 3.64 |
| Fukudome/Ludwick/Hart/Pence/Bruce | RF | 5.37 | 5.67 | 5.33 | 6.29 | 6.33 |
| Fuld/Mather/Gerut/Blum/Dickerson | 4OF | 4.18 | 4.88 | 4.48 | 3.56 | 5.64 |
| Baker/Greene/Gamel/Keppinger/Rosales | Util | 5.58 | 4.09 | 5.81 | 4.98 | 4.76 |
| Average RC27 | 5.42 | 5.28 | 5.48 | 4.85 | 5.10 | |
| Zambrano/Wainwright/Gallardo/Oswalt/Harang | SP | 3.6 | 3.64 | 3.53 | 3.6 | 4.18 |
| Lilly/Carpenter/Wolf/Rodriguez/Volquez | SP | 3.76 | 2.95 | 3.87 | 4.12 | 4 |
| Dempster/Lohse/Suppan/Norris/Arroyo | SP | 3.83 | 4.35 | 5.09 | 5.05 | 4.11 |
| Wells/Penny/Parra/Paulino/Bailey | SP | 4.16 | 4.01 | 4.59 | 5.19 | 4.87 |
| Gorzelanny/Boggs/Bush/Moehler/Cueto | SP | 4.11 | 5.4 | 4.29 | 5.08 | 4.4 |
| Average ERA | 3.89 | 4.07 | 4.27 | 4.61 | 4.31 | |
| Marmol/Franklin/Hoffman/Lyon/Cordero | CL | 3.45 | 4.13 | 2.43 | 3.73 | 3.15 |
| Guzman/Motte/Hawkins/Lindstrom/Rhodes | SU | 4.03 | 3.54 | 3.29 | 4.76 | 2.89 |
| Grabow/Reyes/Villanueva/Fulchino/Herrera | SU | 4 | 3.91 | 4.09 | 4.94 | 3.54 |
| Marshall/Miller/Coffey/Arias/Masset | RP | 4.06 | 3.72 | 4.45 | 4.64 | 4.82 |
| Average ERA | 3.89 | 3.83 | 3.57 | 4.52 | 3.6 | |
Now, a little more qualification - yes, I'm missing a lot of depth here. There's no way these teams all use just 5 starters, etc. I've gone and included two bench players, which may be questionable to you, too, but it did help clarify situations where I wasn't sure who'd really be playing a position all year long (e.g. Baker/Fontenot or McGeHee/Gamel). I'm also not accounting for defense which stinks. Please someone do this better!
Oh, and, yeah, projections are just projections. But since it's winter and they aren't playing the games right now (and, yes, Virgina, they will play the games), looking at projections gives us a way to think about where things are from a more objective base. I certainly would adjust some of these projections, and hope there's good debate below about how to adjust the projections.
Right now, the Brewers have the best offense and the Cubs have the best rotation. The Cubs' offense and rotation surpass the Cards while their bullpens look fairly equivelant. However, if you add Holliday to the Cards their offense jumps up a good bit to 5.57 average RC27. Holliday is a big upgrade.
For the Cubs, add Marlon Byrd in place of Tyler Colvin and the Cubs go up to 5.49. Byrd's no Holliday. But, for what it's worth, Bill James does project him to add a lot more offensively than Mike Cameron. Let me know what other players you want me to insert and adjust these ratings with and I'll give it a try.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
118 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Umm.... (yes, I'm going there)
did you plug in Bradley at all? I mean, he still is on the roster – at least as of today. Or did Colvin and Fuld project higher than Bradley so it’s a moot point…
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Bradley comes in at 6.02 RC27
which is a lot more than any of our OFs or Byrd.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
what does that do
to the RC27 average for the Cubs?
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Dec 17, 2009 3:37 PM CST up reply actions
Replacing Colvin with MB bumps it to 5.57
No single move (that I see as realistic) improves the offense more than keeping Bradley, although you could easily argue that DJ’s idea of shoe-horning in to get Ellsbury would be a more thorough-going improvement since Ellsbury should be a defensive improvement (assuming his UZR last year was flukily low), and additionally a total offensive package improvement since he gives us a “genuine lead-off hitter.” Ellsbury replacing Colvin would bump it to 5.54.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
so keeping Bradley
makes us the best team on paper in two of three projections, and we stay middle of the pack on the third.
I wonder if the bullpen will be better this year without having to pitch half of every one of Harden’s starts…
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Dec 17, 2009 3:56 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I didn't realize that -
Our offense with Bradley projects the same as St. Louis’ with Holliday.
The ‘pen is a concern, although I like the young arms in the system and think we’ll have someone step forward out of that group.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
that's why I'm still thinking/hoping...
…Hendry/Ricketts takes advantage of a somewhat down market, waits out the competition, and signs Valverde to a 3 yr deal.
IIRC, he’s been pricing himself in the $10-12M range, but IMO anything around $8M AAV would be a great investment, i.e. Ricketts could be convinced it would make sense to increase budget to sign him.
Plus, it would give us a legitimate trading chip in Marmol. Not that he wasn’t legitimate before, but now we could trade him without leaving a hole in the ’pen. And if he stays, the pen is even stronger.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Milton Bradley will be the team MVP in 2010.
I’m calling it right now. Bookmark this thread.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 17, 2009 4:47 PM CST up reply actions
Yes, because I won't be wrong.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 17, 2009 5:27 PM CST up reply actions
well, before I bookmark this thread, please do tell...
…what does “MVP” stand for in your demented twisted mind-expanding psychedelic soup-induced world?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
he will be the team AND the NL MVP
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
If Milton wins the NL MVP...
I will let change my signature and avatar, and let BLou pick them.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 18, 2009 12:14 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Well, you did say "team" MVP, not the Cubs MVP
So, if he’s Seattle’s MVP, it still counts?
Some people say the glass is half empty, some say half full. I say, are you going to drink that?
by BleedsbluinMI on Dec 18, 2009 12:10 PM CST up reply actions
I know
that baseball isn’t all about numbers, but sometimes, they really make you take a different look at a situation…
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Dec 17, 2009 8:42 PM CST up reply actions
I'm going to say the Cards...
Especially if they re-sign Holliday. They’re the defending NL Central Champs and their pitching is still solid. It’ll be a good race down to the end.
Someday we'll go all the way...
What if the Cardinals DON'T re-sign Holliday?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I’d like to see the stats with Bradley, and I presume you haven’t done any weighing of position players vs utility players. I guess I would have put Baker in at 2b instead of Fonty.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
I didn't weight positions
since I was just taking the top two bench players, and in several cases, I wasn’t sure those bench players wouldn’t play more than the starters on the MLB.com depth charts.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
The Cards have...
…two shut down starters and the best hitter in baseball, and I would give them the nod.
On paper, the Cubs roster may look better (as it did last year), but I have to go more on what happens on the field.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Does that mean that if you were going by what happened on the field
that you’d have been right to predict the Cubs in ’09 since they were a 97 win team in ’08?
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
You bet...
…and to add one thing, the Cards have a history of putting better fitting pieces in place and getting the most out of them, the Cubs don’t.
The Cards have also shown they can survive injuries fairly well, and still stay in the hunt.
The Cubs could win the division in 2010, but they will need more things to go there way then the Cards will.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Still Very Early in Offseason, But...
I don’t see how the Cubs can be favored to win the division with the way the roster currently looks. There’s not enough firepower offensively. The Cubs rotation isn’t as good as the Cardinals. I hope the Cubs can grab another good bat in the offseason, but the team’s hands are tied with too many expensive contracts on the payroll. The Cubs rotation isn’t exactly bad but getting another good arm in that rotation would help in competing with the Cardinals. I don’t believe the Cubs have the bargaining chips to attract another quality starting pitcher.
"The big possums walk late." - Harry Caray
Don't forget
In 2007 Cubs were not the favorite to win. Everyone said they’re built to make the playoffs in 2008 (and they were very right).
But right now I think Cardinals have the edge over the Cubs. If they sign Holliday then I think they’re the favorites. But baseball works in mysterious ways. For as much as we know, cylinders click and the Pirates win the division. It won’t happen but you never know!
Before doing this
I thought the Cards would be clear favorites if they signed Holliday, and probably still favorites if they ended up with someone like Nady instead, but their pitching depth does not impress me. Can the Cards expect both Penny and Carpenter to stay healthy all season?
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
But they also had Wainright
He’s very good. I’m not so sure about Carpenter’s durability and Penny doesn’t impress me that much.
What Cubs need to do is improve playing against teams in other divisions in 2010. They’ve always played very well in the NL Central. Even when they won 60+ games in 2006, they were in second place within games played in the division.
It's gonna be the Pirates.
They’re just luring us into a false sense of security, making everyone forget about the lowly Pirates… they’ll wait until the time is right, and… WHAM! We won’t even know what hit us.
THEY'VE GOT US RIGHT WHERE THEY WANT US!
I anxiously await the reasonable trading of Milton Bradley.
Dum spiro spero... | Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Dec 17, 2009 3:14 PM CST up reply actions
I agree
They have Ronnie Cedeno so we have no chance.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 17, 2009 3:41 PM CST up reply actions
Just wait patiently for him to slide over the bag at 2nd.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
I would take Phillips over any of those 2Bs, yet Fonty and Weeks are better???
The stat you used must not be looking at last years numbers.
by Don't Fear the Reaper on Dec 17, 2009 3:09 PM CST reply actions
Bill James projects Phillips to hit poorly
.269/.322/.434. Last year, Phillips hit .276/.329/.447. Brandon Phillips is a great option for fantasy baseball, but not nearly as good in real baseball.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
The Cardinals are potentially losing a lot of what made them good last year
Their staff after Wainright and Carpenter is iffy. Holliday is up in the air. That being said, they have Dave Duncan, Tony La Russa and some guy named Pujols. That makes them the favorite in my eyes. After that, I say Brewers, Cubs, Astros, Reds, Pirates
"If I were playing third base and my mother were rounding third with the run that was going to beat us, I'd trip her. Oh, I'd pick her up and brush her off and say, 'Sorry, Mom,' but nobody beats me." ~ Leo Durocher
Well, if we use the last decade as a guide,
either the Cubs or Cardinals will win the division. Also, only one of the two will make the playoffs as the rivals have never made the playoffs in the same year.
Hey, it's a new century!
I voted for health and nutra systems
Soriano, Ramirez and Lilly’s health and Soto making a appearance on the biggest loser.
Cubs will add a piece somewhere, I hope it is the rotation. I am not sold on Shark, Gorzo and Marshall holding the 4/5 spots until Ted comes back.
If the Cubs ever part with MB, I would like Dye in right and keep Dome in center. Thats me.
Cubs will win the division by default. 88-74 at this date.
Adding Dye in place of Colvin gives us 5.53.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
I respect the numbers
However I just can’t see Colvin out producing Dye. This is all projection and speculation, but Colvin better than Dye, wow.
I must have been unclear.
Dye projects well better than Colvin. We’d move up over .1 in average RC27 if Dye replaced Colvin.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Thats on me.
I am still trying to learn WAR, and the like.
I have always liked Dye. He could come cheap in late January.
I'm assuming the Lilly numbers anticipate him starting
the season on opening day and at 100%.
With my expectation Holliday will sign in STL and Lilly won’t be 100%, I’d have to say Cards in 1st, Brewers in 2nd.
If Soto is closer to his ‘08 than ’09, Soriano can play to his 07/08 self, Ramirez is healthy and Lilly is back to 100% by 5/1, I think the Cubs will win the division. I’m just thinking that’s too many IF’s.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
Bill James sees Lilly pitching 170 IP
I am not weighting the “average ERA” by projected IP. I’m certainly doing this quick and dirty.
Bill James does like Gorz and Marshall for low 4 ERAs, but he does not like Samardzija.
I’d argue that the Cards’ “ifs” in their rotation are comparable to our offensive “ifs.”
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
If the Cards sign Holliday,
and if Carp and Penny stay healthy all year, and if Franklin doesn’t turn back into a pumpkin, and if Pujols doesn’t get hurt again and his elbow holds up. That’s too many if’s, too.
See what I mean? This isn’t exactly pro-Cubs, it’s just anti-selective skepticism.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Dec 17, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions
I agree, but I see a difference.
With the Cards you mentioned, you’re counting on them to duplicate their efforts of 2009.
With the Cubs I mention, we’re counting on them not to duplicate their 2009 and/or come back from injury.
Which one are you more comfortable with?
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
I think it's an equal proposition
Will Soriano return to his form pre-2009? And will Carp return to his form pre-2009? If so, I’d take Soriano over Carp.
We can project all we want to, but projections aren’t the Burning Bush.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Dec 17, 2009 4:07 PM CST up reply actions
I realize we disagree, and I'm good with that.
Every team has it’s share of “IF’s,” I’m more comfortable expecting a player to duplicate success (not career year success) than expecting major improvement.
at daver's request, Let's frontload this B**ch!
Well
that’s why it’s better to use someone else’s projections, because the projection systems can look past just the past two years and tell us how these players’ entire careers predict future performance. Certainly the projection system will miss in specific cases because it doesn’t know anything about Geo’s weight, Albert’s elbow, etc., but in general it will be more right than any of us speculating about so many players.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
well
with the Cards, they’re being expected to keep their performance high.
With the Cubs, you’re expecting two of three (Soto, Soriano, Ramirez) to return to NORMS.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Dec 17, 2009 8:45 PM CST up reply actions
i wouldnt say 2008 is the "norm" for soto
Say no to Marlon Byrd, Scotty Pods, and Rick Ankiel.
by jesus christos on Dec 17, 2009 10:15 PM CST up reply actions
You mean like this "norm"?
“Hey Mr. Peterson, there’s a cold one waiting for you.”
“I know, if she calls, I’m not here.”
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
i don't see why people think the cubs rotation is so great
zambrano and dempster are both serviceable #2 guys, but lilly has to be considered a ? with his health and i need to see another full year for wells before i pencil him in as a solid 4. and our options for 5 aren’t exactly appetizing (granted, very few teams have appetizing options for 5). are zambrano, dempster, lilly and wells really enough to make our starting pitching a strength? i don’t know.
people think the cubs rotation is so great...
because it made up of 4 guys who would be at least a #3 starter on any other team. We lack a legitimate ace (::opens Z-Ace can of worms::), but not many teams have 4 pitchers with the capacity ours has. They may stink in 2010, but all of them have shown the ability to produce for extended periods of time.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 17, 2009 4:51 PM CST up reply actions
Other than St. Louis
Can you think of any other team in the NL Central that has what you consider an ace?
I’m not thinking too hard but I can’t name anyone. Three years ago we could have argued Aaron Harang I guess.
Until he got hurt...
Roy Oswalt.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 17, 2009 5:09 PM CST up reply actions
Yovani Gallardo
Kid is going to be real good.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
I agree.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
That's all Milwaukee has
He’s good but I don’t think that team can do anything more than they did last year. Let Fielder and Braun go for personal bests to keep the fans coming in Milwaukee.
The Cubs starters also led the league in quality starts
for most of the season.
by Don't Fear the Reaper on Dec 18, 2009 7:26 AM CST up reply actions
John
I think you’re underrating each of these guys. Gorzelanny and Marshall are back-end options most other teams would love to have. Wells projects well, too. A 4 and change ERA for those three guys is wonderful depth.
I don’t trust the designations of “1” or “2” because everyone means something different. What I’ll say is that Demp and Z project for 3.60-3.75 ERAs and you may wish for something more in the playoffs, but over the course of the season, that gives you the chance to win a lot of games.
Compare that to Houston’s chart. They’ve got one guy in the Z-Demp range, then their next best guy is akin to Wells, and then it’s 5 ERAs to fill out the other three.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Pujols, Carpenter, Wainwright
That about says it all. If the NL Central race were to begin tomorrow honesty compels me to say the Cardinals run away with the division once again. Do they have issues? Sure they do.
2nd place? Milwaukee. Gallardo is a legitimate ace and Wolf a good addition. The offense led by Braun, Fielder and Weeks should also be quality.
The Blackhawks and the Stanley Cup in 2010.
If three players "say it all"
you’re basically admitting you either cannot or will not do in depth analysis of the situation.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
It's his baseball acumen that makes up for whatever you think he's not considering.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Dec 17, 2009 5:32 PM CST up reply actions
Well,
I’ll see his Pujols-Carp-Wwright with a Cliff Lee – C.C. Sabathia – Grady Sizemore trio and raise him a Victor Martinez, and that gives me the 2008 Cleveland Indians, a .500 team.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Why?
As a trio are they not as valuable as St. Louis’ three?
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
and just look what Santo-Banks-Williams did all those years...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Perhaps our differing valuation
breaks down in how much I value health – which is a big bonus for CC and a big negative for Carp.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Weeks and Quality
That does not compute. In what way is Weeks quality?
by IllinoisCubs on Dec 18, 2009 10:35 AM CST up reply actions
pirates
they have the one the holy books refer to as “ONEDEC”
Say no to Marlon Byrd, Scotty Pods, and Rick Ankiel.
here's a quick and dirty projection using WAR:
1) A team made up of all replacement level players is worth 47 wins (this baseline has been established by Dave Cameron and others)
2) I’ll use the WAR projections compiled by fans at fangraphs for position players:
Lee (4.1)
Baker (1.3)
Theriot (3.2)
Ramirez (4.8)
Soriano (1.5)
Fuld (1.0)
Fukudome (2.9)
Soto (4.2)
position player total WAR = 23.0
3) Using 2009’s total pitching WAR (Gregg and Heilman added no WAR value last year anyway) you get 18.0
So the team can be expected to win 47+23+18 = 88 WINS
One note: In general, fans’ WAR numbers seem a bit optimistic than other methods, but I see 85-88 wins as a ceiling for the team under ideal conditions (everyone is relatively healthy and everyone’s numbers regress to their career averages). Adding a 2 WAR CF like Byrd bumps the ceiling to about 87-90 wins. This is primarily why I advocated the Granderson trade: it allowed the 2010 to make serious final run with this core of expensive (but talented) players (and he’d be around to mentor young players during a 2011 rebuild mode). On paper, it’s clear that one good player (see Holliday) can tilt the division in one direction. What StL does this offseason could well be more important than anything the Cubs do from here on out.
by Andronicus on Dec 17, 2009 6:31 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I would rather have done this by WAR
but I wasn’t sure I trusted the fans’ projections.
I will question you saying the team has a 85-88 win ceiling. Projections like these are median projections which means the team could over-perform, or be lucky in 1-run games, so that 85-88 seems more like the median projection than the ceiling.
I very much agree that one good player could tip things – but this is also why I still contend the best strategy is to play half a season and make sure 1 good player doesn’t end up injured and out for the season. We won’t lose much, if any value, from our tradeable assets by playing the first part of 2010 to win.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
using last season's WAR
for pitching is already a high end estimate, in my opinion
we’ll lose starts from lilly to start the season, lose harden and gain marshall/gorzelanny and both lilly and wells seemed to pitch above their peripherals
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 17, 2009 9:28 PM CST up reply actions
definitely,
i used the 09 numbers out of pure laziness. If Lilly loses significant starts and Gorzelanny doesn’t pitch above replacement level, that’s a loss of 3 wins or so That’s also why I really think 88 wins is a ceiling as opposed to a median. The Cubs’ pitching staff was the 5th luckiest team in baseball with a 3.84 ERA and 4.11 FIP.
If it was just the pitching to calculate I could almost agree with that
but the offense underfperformed last year more than the pitching over-performed.
And then you also can’t rule out that these pitchers take a step forward, that Z finally puts it all together, that Lilly has a contract year, that Gorz keeps pitching 9 K/IP… I’m not saying that’s all likely; I’m saying it’s possible and why “ceiling” is still not appropriate.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
he's using a PROJECTION
for the hitting already so that’s taking into account the offense rebounding
For established players like Z and Lilly its extremely unlikely they can take the big types of jumps forward that you’re suggesting would move the needle. Last year his WAR was 3.6 for the last 7 years its been between 2.8 and 4.9, sure maybe he out-performs and adds a win to the total, but for the last 4 years he’s been between 2.8 and 3.9 suggesting his bar has been lowered as he’s aged (really more a result of the heavy workload early in his career than age). If the last 4 years is more indicative of his range of performance there’s little room for improvement
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=305&position=P#value
Ted Lilly is coming off the best season of his career AND is going to miss time to start the season, suggesting an improvement over last year’s performance at age 34 while already missing time early in the season is beyond “dreaming”
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=833&position=P#value
This is why a pitching improvement is so unlikely, pretty much EVERY one of our starters are coming off of career years or close to it. To suggest that they’re all going to improve upon career years is overly optimistic to the point of “kool-aid” drinking.
If we’re going to have improvement in the pitching this year its going to take a significant improvement from Gorzelanny over Harden (Harden was only a 1.8 WAR player last year, so that is possible, although Gorz’s best season ever was a 2.9 WAR, so maybe a win there) and the bullpen is going to have to improve.
I think its very likely the offense improves this season and the pitching takes a step back. This is why I think our median range is 83-86 and our ceiling is probably 87-90. Now admittedly, if the Cardinals don’t resign Holliday (I’ve assumed they would all along as the Yankees and Red Sox have both said they’re not interested), we’re basically the same team as the Cardinals. If the Cards sign Holliday though I think we’re 3-5 wins behind them heading into the season
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 7:52 AM CST up reply actions
A few things
As I said above – you can’t expect the Cubs to perform above the median, but you can’t discount the possibility. Let me go one step farther – if the Cubs are over-performing their median and the Cards’ under-performing and the two clubs are neck and neck – then you should still be more pessimistic than optimistic in-season.
I recognize the hitting projection is a median – I said so above, after all. What I’m contending is that you’re over-selling the difference between the Cubs’ peripherals and their ERAs. Gorzelanny was unluckier than any two combined Cubs were lucky. Zambrano and Marshall were also unlucky.
So, when you say that despite what the numbers say above the Cubs are 3-5 wins behind the Cards is that because you think the projections are all wrong or I’ve put the numbers together wrong? After all, we know your pessimistic perspective. Now’s the time to defend it with #s.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
gorzelanny
pitched 47 innings, its not the same amount of unlucky as ted lilly’s 177 innings
you’re not weighting averages which is why you’re not understanding the difference
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:15 AM CST up reply actions
I admitted I didn't want to give the time to weighting averages.
I wish you would take up doing this project right – otherwise we’re waiting for PECOTA…
The point remains that if you just go by FIP we have a rotation with FIPs all under 4.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
FIP of one year
where most of the pitchers pitched above past FIPs
and why do I have to take the time to do it right? Why is that responsibility on me? You’re the one providing all sorts of inaccurate misleading numbers and then its my job to fix it?
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:24 AM CST up reply actions
for example
FIPS last 3 years of starters:
Zambrano – 3.61, 4.23, 4.58
Dempster – 3.87, 3.41, 4.54
Lilly – 3.65, 4.41, 4.16
Wells – 3.88, 4.44, 4.00 (at AAA)
Gorzelanny – 3.91, 6.35, 4.24
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:27 AM CST up reply actions
So your contention is that
you can project better than Bill James – then show your math.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
we don't have pitching projections
what are you talking about?
you’re using last year’s FIP, not Projections
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:32 AM CST up reply actions
The numbers in the original fanpost above
are Bill James’ projections for pitchers.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
ok
i see what you’re getting at now. The focus of the thread had been on 2009 WAR and 2009 FIPS
original post:
“3) Using 2009’s total pitching WAR (Gregg and Heilman added no WAR value last year anyway) you get 18.0”
next posts:
“The Cubs’ pitching staff was the 5th luckiest team in baseball with a 3.84 ERA and 4.11 FIP.”
“The point remains that if you just go by FIP we have a rotation with FIPs all under 4.”
so on and so forth
and then you just changed it to suggest i could project better than James to alter the discussion. Ok point taken. No I cannot project better than Bill James, and I can’t project better than Chones, but one seems overtly optimistic and the other overtly pessimistic
i simply was doing the math to show you that we weren’t “unlucky” as a rotation last year as you suggest, in fact Andronicus takes the whole staff and shows our team ERA was .30 lower than our FIP, making us the 5th luckiest team in baseball last year for pitching
I’ve indicated given the luck last year in performance and health, and given that most pitchers on our staff pitched towards the high end of past FIPs, it would seem to suggest our pitching is likely to take a step backwards next year and perhaps a significant one (if health regresses at all, or if pitchers FIPs regress to 2006-2008 levels
I don’t know how more clear I can be on this topic. Every time I feel I make a post clearly dictating it you try to take it in another direction
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 9:04 AM CST up reply actions
do you realize?
FIP isn’t a projection, its a measurement of what actually happened on the field and removing luck that would sway other measurements of what actually happened
FIP varies from year to year based on how well pitchers pitched. All I’m suggesting is the FIP last year for all the starters was towards the higher end of their last 3 years production. This would suggest last season they performed better than they have in previous years.
This isn’t a “projection” this is an account of what actually happened and I’m suggesting what actually happened last year has been towards the higher end of what these players have produced their entire careers. Thus I’m expecting some semblance of regression in their performance
I’m not suggesting I can project better than anyone. We don’t have any pitching projections to work with to my knowledge, other than CHONE
CHONE projects
Zambrano – 4.28
Gorzelanny – 4.47
Randy Wells – 4.68
Ted Lilly – 4.34
Dempster – 4.20
http://www.baseballprojection.com/2010/CHN2010p.htm
and i the “pessimist” think we can beat those projections
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:38 AM CST up reply actions
Pitching Peripherals
Gorzelanny ERA 5.55 FIP 3.91
Zambrano ERA 3.77 FIP 3.61
Marshall ERA 4.32 FIP 4.19
Dempster ERA 3.65 FIP 3.87
Lilly ERA 3.10 FIP 3.65
Wells ERA 3.05 FIP 3.88
All told, the Cubs’ potential starters as of right now were 0.33 more unlucky than lucky comparing their ERAs to their FIPs.
The other story that’s not being told when we concentrate on the gaps between Lilly’s and Wells’ ERAs/FIPs is that if our rotation just had the same FIPs they had last year, our five starters would all have ERAs under 4 and our swingman would be just about 4. No, we wouldn’t have an ace under 3, but that’s the only complaint you can muster when you have two starters at 3.65, and three more at 3.90.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
correction - not "about"
our swingman would be just “above” 4
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
luck in performance AND health
the last 2 years the Cubs have had every single member of their rotation make at least 26 starts, with the exception of Harden in 2008 who was a mid season acquisition
that’s extremely good fortune with health that most teams don’t get. This is just another reason I’m concerned about the prospects of our pitching performing up to 2008 or 2009 standards.
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:02 AM CST up reply actions
Ok, I can address that, too, but first
are you still contending that the Cubs were more lucky than unlucky despite the actual numbers?
As for the IP the projections see 180 IP for Z, 170 for Lilly, 188 for Wells, 195 for Demp…
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
how about the "actual numbers"
the actual numbers would WEIGHT the innings
in these instances we weren’t 0.33 more unlucky than lucky… that’s ridiculous
Gorzelanny – 47 innings (-1.64), weighted = -0.11
Zambrano – 169 1/3 innings (-0.16), weighted = -0.03
Marshall – 85 1/3 innings (-0.13), weighted = -0.02
Dempster – 200 innings (0.22), weighted = 0.06
Lilly – 177 innings (0.83), weighted = .14
678 2/3 total innings, so in total we were .04 luckier not 0.33 unluckier
mind you that’s just starters
Marmol, Guzman and Grabow who are supposed to be our top 3 relievers going into the season and all pitched well above their FIP. Now since they’re relievers they won’t move the needle as much, but without doing all the heavy lifting, my guess is our total pitching was say 0.10 luckier than we produced
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:23 AM CST up reply actions
Now you're just playing with numbers in a way that is not meaningful.
Because the whole reason we don’t use ERA to project for the next 150-200 IP is that FIP is more likely to be accurate. So the # of innings they were lucky last year is irrelevant. What’s relevant is the IP you project going forward at the FIP rate.
We have a rotation projected to put up sufficient IP with ERAs under 4.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
FIP fluctuates
that is #1, see my post above. You’re taking the FIP of nearly career years for most of the pitchers and assuming it maintains. That’s a HUGE assumption. THen you’re assuming health remains constant, which our luck with health has been amongst the best in baseball, another HUGE assumption.
i’m not playing with numbers, i’m doing a weighted average of the impact of luck last year to disprove your “playing with numbers” above
you stated we were 0.33 unluckier, which is ridiculous
i did the actual calculation on the starters to show based on weighted averages we were slightly luckier
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:32 AM CST up reply actions
how much crappier
is our rotation with Silva in it?
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Dec 18, 2009 12:25 PM CST up reply actions
chone projects him
for a 4.54 ERA…. better than Randy Wells
although that seems ridiculous
Silva is a worse version, though less outspoken, of Jason Marquis
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 12:45 PM CST up reply actions
i think the point that needs to be clear is:
The Cubs have a poor chance of reproducing the 18 WAR from their pitching staff in 2010. The loss of Harden and Lilly (for several starts) , in combination with the addition of Silva (who Dave Cameron pointed out today, is essentially a replacement level pitcher), has real consequences. This is true even if you assume pitchers will be exactly as productive (and lucky, unlucky, etc.) as they were last year.
agreed
and if you assume any semblance of luck regression or players returning to 2006-2008 levels…. things could get REALLY ugly
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 3:15 PM CST up reply actions
If you expect to put Silva in the rotation -
then, yes, it will be bad. I’d hope Lou will know better than to start Silva over Gorz and Marshall. James predicts a 4.85 ERA for Silva in Seattle.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
that's the plan early on
“Silva will compete for a starting spot this spring, and is likely to begin the season in the rotation, at least until Ted Lilly gets back sometime in May. After that, it depends on how Silva fares on the mound. He could wind up in middle relief. "
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2009/12/cubs-hendry-takes-blame-for-bradley-fiasco.html
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 3:26 PM CST up reply actions
Well, we'll see what Lou will do.
At the Aaron Miles unveiling last year, it was said Miles would compete for a starting job.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
As of now
I know the numbers don’t support it, but I’ll go with … Houston Astros. We’re talking rosters … as of now, right? A healthy Oswalt with Wandy Rodriguez is an excellent one-two punch. I could potentially see Paulino or Norris stepping forward a bit more (probably Paulino). That is their biggest need right now – having a 3rd starter emerge. The pen has enough options that I think they can figure something out to be … capable enough, and the lineup should be alright, albeit probably inconsistent and streaky. They’ve got enough chips that, if they are in it, they could make one semi-big deal (albeit, it’d likely wreck the farm again … not that the farm is good right now … it’s still bottom 3rd, and probably bottom 5, but it’s improved from last year).
Do I really think the Astros will win it? Nah. I hope they stick around so McLane will have a reason to hold off on rebuilding. But right now, every single team in the NL Central has holes. As I said in the other thread, I don’t really think any team in the division looks like a solid playoff squad (I only have 4 teams as of now that I think are solid playoff squads – Philly, LaD, NYY, Bos … even though the Rays could be quality again).
The Cardinals need a big bat behind Pujols. Holliday would obviously give them a huge boost, but if not, they need Ludwick to step up. I’m also taking a wait and see on that pen, and their rotation needs someone to overachieve and be a solid enough 3rd starter. Their system’s fairly average and their ability to make a big trade might be limited. No need to discuss the Cubs here. I don’t get this fascination that some have with the idea that the Brewers lineup is great. I see 2 great bats – Fielder/Braun … and a very average cast around that, unless you buy Casey McGehee, which I’m not ready to yet. I’m also taking a wait and see on Weeks. Their pen could be okay, but a rotation of Gallardo/Wolf/Suppan/Bush/Parra doesn’t scare, even if I think Parra could turn it around. They have Gamel as a potential trade chip, so maybe they could make a swap, although if Gamel gets exposed anymore as a hitter, his value will go down. There are nice young arms in the lower levels, but for them to ponder a big deal at midseason, they’d likely need a quality upper level chip like Gamel could be to use.
The Reds are an enigma. On raw talent, there’s a lot. On the ability to be consistent – not sure. They are listening on Harang, who was still their best arm, and they need a young arm … or two … or three … to really, really step up. The bullpen could probably be decent. The lineup … well, I see it as a streaky lineup. There are enough chips to swing a big trade if they decided to go after it (particualrly since one of their top chips plays 1st base – Yonder Alonso). I think the Pirates could be more competitive than what people are giving them credit for, but Huntington is still in the early stages of rebuilding, so unless they are in it at midseason, they’ll likely spin some more guys off/
I think the fact that you can make a decent case that Houston is the divisional favorite
just goes to show how silly it is to write off ‘10. You’ve got to let these guys play at least a third of a season and see how things look.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
remember the mantra from last season?
50 games does not a season make.
75 games does not a season make.
100 games does not a season make.
division contender vs. world series contender
Now there are some people who are writing off 2010 thinking we’re going to win 75-80 games or something like that, which I agree is ridiculous
But i think there’s a group out there that aren’t “writing off” (that’s too strong), but don’t see a way in which the team can become a world series contender. This is my position. And I think the people who hold this position aren’t interested in “writing things off”, but aren’t interested in “going all in” either because they don’t believe there is a single move that can make us a legitimate world series contender
Contention for a bad division? Sure. Hoping to get extremely lucky in the playoffs? Sure.
But is that a formula for success long-term? Hoping to win a bad division with 88 wins and then get lucky in the playoffs? I think that’s the issue a lot of the perceived negative posters have with the Cubs right now. We’re in limbo a bit
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 7:59 AM CST up reply actions
I've never said it was a formula for long-term success
and have repeatedly said it’s not the formula for long-term success.
But I’ve made the case that just getting to the playoffs adds a lot of money to the coffers – something you have never responded to.
You also have to ask this question – if the Cubs look like an 88 win team, is there a move at the trade deadline that could bump them up into the next level? The talent we start the season with is the talent we end the season with.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
show me the actual dollars
on how much it “adds to the coffers”, give me something.. some facts… for some reason I’m responsible for all the facts in the discussion and you’re not
Also any addition that could be meaningful mid season and make us world series contenders is likely to be severely debilitating to the future. I’m not interested in making a move that gets us closer to the top competition this year but destroys us for years 2, 3, and 4 down the line
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 18, 2009 8:29 AM CST up reply actions
DCF
You’ve now stated that I’m producing no facts, that I don’t understand the level you’re working at and
providing all sorts of inaccurate misleading numbers.
I’m not continuing down this path with you. I understand you’re frustrated at the state of the Cubs, so I remain hopeful that we’ll be able to have better conversations in the future.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
since someone brought up a comment elsewhere
I want to emphasize some things.
a) I don’t really think the Astros will win it. Let me go further – I don’t think I would project the Astros winning it by the end of January. I’ve said it in there, but some folks seemed to have miss it. While I will stick by the Astros projection yesterday (and as of now, no other significant moves have been made), it was also a nod towards, nothing personal DGU, the ridiculousness of discussing a division champ, as this board has repeatedly done, in December.
b) Projections are great. I read and look at them as much as the general online baseball fan, even if many may comprehend it more than I do, having never spent the time to really get into understanding the details of the advanced metrics. That said, I think we often read too much into individual projections as a sign of how good a team will be, knowing full well the fallibility of projections, the potential for randomness, and human nature. Do projections typically have some basis to lean that we should watch during the course of a season? Sure. It’s something to read, something to analyze, but let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves.
c) Things are pushing ahead with a Holliday resigning with the Cards … and if he does resign, I would put the Cardinals first. Right now, I am not sold on the Cardinals lineup (along with the pen and the back of the rotation), as great as Albert is. But with Holliday in there, I can buy it a bit more. With Holliday, they could live with an inconsistent Ludwick/Rasmus. They could live with Freese. Allen Craig could be a big bat off the bench, instead of someone you are depending upon.
d) I do think the Astros will be their usual selves this year – signs of being competitive, but not enough. If Oswalt is healthy, it’s a good one-two punch folks, and Paulino/Norris both showed promise. One thing I noted in there that some folks glossed over is that the Astros have enough to swing a big trade at midseason if they manage to hang around.
by toonsterwu on Dec 18, 2009 2:45 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd
I totally agree:
the ridiculousness of discussing a division champ, as this board has repeatedly done, in December.
The inspiration for this fanpost was the ongoing assumption that St. Louis was better than the division – even without re-signing Holliday.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Sigh
Just another 2010 projection which reflects that the Cubs would be a better team in 2010 with MB on it, than without. If we kept Bradley, we could spend money to increase production at 2nd base and BP. I guess Byrd would be an alright pickup, but his OBP leaves a lot to be desired, and you still have the issues at 2nd base and in the BP, but without any money to spend on those weaknesses
Yep
Defense is a big hole in all this. I’d like to see someone else offer defensive projections. Maybe I’ll get around to it myself.
The MLB.com depth chart has Schumaker as the current starter in LF with no one behind him and the starter at 2B with Lugo behind him. I imagine that even if Holliday is not added, some LF will be; so this is a snapshot as of a day ago.
"We’re going to come back here next year healthy and do what we’re supposed to do, and we’re going to be all right. That’s not Hendry’s fault. He thought it was the right move. It didn’t work out. But at the same time, he’s the same guy that put back-to-back championship teams together." - Aramis Ramirez
Cubs
Don’t hate me cause I’m beau naive. ;D
A woman's guess is more accurate than a man's certainty.--Rudyard Kipling
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
