I have all kinds of respect for Al, and I absolutely support the need for optimism regarding a franchise that hasn't won a championship in 100 years.

Still, I have to say, Al's player projections (I'm referring to his original ones, not the combined averages of everyone who's made predictions) share one characteristic: Too optimistic.

Just looking at the eight hitters he's profiled so far (Soto, Fukodome, Lee, Pie, Soriano, Theriot, Ramirez, DeRosa) I notice that he doesn't predict anyone to have an off year. Not only that - he's forecasting what I'd consider career or nearly career years for Lee, Ramirez and Soriano, and is expecting Fukodome to have no trouble at all adjusting to a new league/new country (maybe this is possible - but then again, he may not be the second coming of Ichiro).

In sum, Al expects these 8 players to combine for 171 homers (and this is including Theriot, Pie and Soto - none of whom have demonstrated much power in the MLB so far). That means the Cubs as a team will hit well over 200 homers. I hope so. But I wouldn't count on it after the team combined for just 151 last year and only added one offensive player of any note during the offseason. He also says not a single one of these players will hit under .275. I'd love to see that, believe me. But I don't think it's going to happen. I particularly have my doubts whether Pie can go from .215 to .275. I hope - believe me - but I have doubts.

The pitching projections also seem too optimstic, though a bit more restrained. I suppose we can hope Zambrano's ERA falls by almost 50 points from last year, and that Hill develops into one of the elite pitchers in the NL (as Al's projections predict), but then again, what are the odds of both of those things happening the same year?

I hope Al is right. If he is, it will be one exciting summer. But on the other hand, one has to expect at least a few players to have off years in 2008. If all the players perform as Al is predicting, the Cubs have no excuse not to go all the way.

Hard times for former Cub Lary Sorensen:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/chi-08-sorensonfeb08,1,980745.story

Sad to see.

Sorensen was basically done by the time he pitched for the Cubs. But in 1978 with the Brewers he went 18-12 with a 3.21 ERA and pitched more than 280 innings and 17 complete games at age 22.

With the Cubs in 1985 he was 3-7 with a 4.26 ERA.

Apparently, Sorensen has spoken at schools about the dangers of alcohol. Looks like he hasn't been taking his own advice.

On SI.com, Bill James today listed who he thinks are the top-50 young players (under age 29) in baseball today.

Not a single Cub made the list, and Prince Fielder was ranked number one. Argh!

Seriously, what does it say about the Cubs' system of talent hunting that not a single player was in the top 50? Nothing good. I could try to quibble with James, and say that Carlos Zambrano should be on the list (he's 26 and deserved a place, in my opinion), but other than that, it's hard to think of a young Cub who deserves to be here.

James also breaks down the young talent team by team, and the Cubs finish 29th. Zambrano is the only A-class young talent on the team, according to James, while Rich Hill and Carlos Marmol get "B"s and Theriot, Marshall and Murton rate Cs.

Thank you, Rick Morrissey, for writing the column that had to be written in today's Sunday Tribune on Dusty Baker and his managing in the 2003 playoffs.

After two years that I've spent on this site trying to defend Dusty's moves in Game Six, which I was at, I'm finally getting some backing. I'll let Morrissey speak for himself:

"You still can hear the moaning long after (Baker's) departure. Why, why didn't he take Mark Prior out of Game 6 when the Cubs were five outs away from going to the World Series? I don't know. Maybe it's because Prior had a three-hit shutout going into the 8th inning, and he was the Cubs' best pitcher. Perhaps it was because setup man Kyle Farnsworth didn't inspire a whole lot of confidence and Baker liked his chances with a pitcher who had gone 18-6 with a 2.43 ERA during the regular season."

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I'm not a wild-eyed Baker fan; in fact, I think he was awful in many ways - especially personality - and his strange attachment to certain over-the-hill players. But I'm sick and tired of hearing how Dusty ruined Mark Prior through over-use. As Morrissey points out, one study that analyzed pitchers from 2000 to 2006 found that Baker's starters averaged 3.68 pitches per start more than they would have been expected to throw under certain conditions.

"In other words," Morrissey writes. "Baker was not a pitcher killer." As I've been saying.

He notes that Prior's injury problems could have started in college or the minors - or under Baker. Nobody knows. "But that hasn't stopped fans and media members, many of them newly minted experts in biomechanics and kinesiology, from blaming Baker for Prior's undoing."

Indeed.

When the Cubs head down to Florida to play the Marlins next week, it could be the Cubs who have home-field advantage, at least the way I see it.

Attendance lately at the Marlins' games has been around 10,000 - officially, anyway. But according to the Tribune, only about 400 fans were on hand when the first pitch was thrown in a recent game. Assuming thousands of Cub fans show up, as they've been doing at other ballparks around the league, these games could end up being like home games for the Cubs, and give them one more advantage as they play a team that talent-wise, isn't in the Cubs' league.

Sure beats what the Brewers have to do: head to Atlanta for four games against a team with a winning record that's still nominally in the wild-card race. I hope the Brewers have to listen to lots of "Tomahawk Chops" while they're down there!

For anyone who was wondering, it has now been 21 games, spanning 82 at-bats, since Derrek Lee has homered. His last homer came on June 3.

Now it's nice that he's batting .350, but I didn't expect him to turn into Rod Carew this year, and I doubt anyone else did, either. With Barrett gone, and now Jones probably being traded (not that he was hitting homers, anyway), the Cubs really need Lee to start hitting with some pop again.

The six homers he's had so far this year put him on pace for around 13. We need more than that from Lee. It's possible, I suppose, that his injury from last year is affecting his power. I can't think of any other reason.

The Tribune reported today that Kerry Wood was scheduled to have his first bullpen session since spring training. With the rain, it's unclear if he got it in today or if he had to wait until tomorrow. It's possible he did it indoors.

Anyway, I like Kerry a lot and hope he makes it back. The Tribune says he's eyeing an early-August return after a minor league rehab. However, given his history, I doubt he'll get through the minor league rehab without re-injuring himself.

I wonder if he's one more injury away from announcing his retirement at age 29. More and more, he's looking like this era's Mark Fidrych (although he did have a few effective years in the majors, unlike Fidrych, who only had one. Fidrych's one year, however, was far better than any of the healthy years Kerry had.)

From CNNSI.com:

The start of the World Series is being pushed back an extra day to Oct. 24, meaning Game 7 is scheduled for November for the first time. Because of extra off-days during the postseason, a team sweeping the NL championship series would have eight days off before its World Series opener.

MY THOUGHTS:

I think this is a lousy idea, and it's all about pleasing TV advertisers (they want the World Series to start in the middle of the week, when viewership tends to be higher.)

So to make the advertisers happy, the World Series is more likely than ever to be played in inclement weather. Let's assume (just for fun) that the Cubs are in the 2007 World Series. And let's assume (because I don't know yet) that Game Seven is a home game for them. And let's assume it occurs Nov. 1 (though since baseball hasn't specified, I suppose it could be as late as Nov. 2).

The average high in Chicago on Nov. 1 is 53, and the average low is 40. But on some November firsts in recent Chicago history, the temperature has failed to climb out of the 30s, and has fallen into the 20s at night (and of course, games would be played at night, this being the World Series). Even with average temperatures for that time of year, November is far from an ideal time to be outside in Chicago trying to decide the seventh game of the World Series. Snow is a distinct possibility.

I'm not saying the weather in Chicago 10 days before Nov. 1 would necessarily be a picnic, but the odds are worse as you get further toward winter, obviously.

It's a shame that with all the extra layers of playoffs, and all the extra off days for TV, the World Series has now become a November event (50 years ago, it was usually over before mid-October.)

It's also a shame that a team might have an 8-day gap between post-season games, as this article stated. I don't think anyone (besides the advertisers and perhaps the fat cats who run baseball) can believe this is good for players (or for fans, who'd be forced to twiddle their thumbs for so long waiting to see another game).

I just wanted to give kudos to Lou Piniella for his strategy with Zambrano this season.

A few days ago, I read in the paper that Lou said he expects to start Zambrano every fifth day, even if there's an off-day in between, meaning that Zambrano will get six starts in April. This means, to my reading, anyway, that Piniella will skip the fifth starter when he has a chance and give Zambrano the start throughout the season.

Hopefully, this means Zambrano can get 34 or 35 starts, instead of 32 or 33. To me, it makes all the sense in the world to go with your best starter as often as possible, at least if you're trying to win. (It also makes sense from the standpoint of a fan - I for one would rather see Zambrano start a game I've paid $40 to watch than Wade Miller).

I understand that you need to keep your fifth starter in the mix, and not let them languish when there's an off day, but there's no reason at all why that pitcher can't go to the bullpen on those occasions.

Looking today at my 1979 Cubs official roster book, I found the following interesting facts: