Reflections on the opener

Opening Day is here, I'm watching three baseball games, and all is right with the world.

• The MLB season opened last night with the Mets beating the Cardinals 6-1. Chris Carpenter struggled but didn't seem to be too off. Tom Glavine wasn't perfect, but pitched through his problems and survived to take home career win #291. 9 more wins and he will become the fifth left-hander in history to win 300 games.
• Tigers starter Kenny Rogers had surgery to remove a blood clot from his left shoulder and will be out until the All-Star Break at least. This isn't the worst of news for Detroit; you can't be surprised when a 42-year-old pitcher goes down with injury. And the Tigers more than most teams can compensate for his loss. Their 1-3 of Bonderman-Verlander-Robertson is still arguably the best in the division. #4 Mark Maroth may not be any kind of sure thing, but the Tigers have several promising guys who can adequately fill the #5 hole. Chad Durbin will get first crack at the job, with uber-prospect Andrew Miller waiting in the wings.
• A lot has been made of the fact that the superpower Yankees are starting free-agent bust Carl Pavano on opening day. It's not the end of the world, but it does illustrate that the Yankees' starting rotation isn't as strong as they'd like. There are questions surrounding every starter on the staff, not just Pavano. But the Yanks should be able to cobble together a decent bunch out of Wang-Mussina-Pettite-Igawa, and when Phillip Hughes arrives, they should be plenty good enough to win with their lineup.
• The Tigers removed one of the top names from next year's free agent market by signing shortstop Carlos Guillen to a four-year, $48 million deal. The deal is utterly reasonable, even if Guillen is forced to move to first base. Guillen as a shortstop is worth far more than $12 mil. per year, which should make up for the fact that he may be slightly overpaid as a first baseman. Guillen is especially valuable to the Tigers, who don't have anyone else on the team with his well-rounded offensive skills. Well, except for Gary Sheffield, who's not exactly the rock to build a team around. Good move here.
• The succession plan for the New York Yankees was called into question recently. With an aging George Steinbrenner nearing the day when he must step away from baseball operations, his successor was supposed to be his son-in-law, Steve Swindal. But recently, Steinbrenner's daughter filed for divorce from Swindal, effectively scrapping that plan. There's no immediate crisis at hand; Steinbrenner is delegating power more than ever to team president Randy Levine and GM Brian Cashman. But as with any big business, a plan of succession is important to ensure future stability. We'll have to stay tuned and see who emerges as the new favorite to succeed the Boss.
• In an utterly surprising move, the Colorado Rockies gave 2-year contract extensions to both GM Dan O'Dowd and manager Clint Hurdle. Both O'Dowd and Hurdle were considered by many to be on the hot seat to some degree this year, with their jobs very much on the line if the team failed to improve. This move is hard to fathom, as it gives a vote of confidence to two men who honestly haven't earned any such confidence.
• In a move that no one expected coming into the spring, Mark Prior failed to make the Cubs' roster out of Spring Training. Prior will start the season in Triple-A. Needless to say, he was less than pleased at the news, not even stopping to talk to reporters after the game.
• With Spring Training over, teams have finalized their roster and made their share of bizarre selections. Every year, teams will make rash decisions based on Spring Training and overestimate the importance of a player's March stats. The prize-winner this year for craziest roster move goes to the Florida Marlins, who selected 22-year-old Alejandro de Aza as their starting center fielder. The Marlins have thus assured themselves that they will be getting the worst production from center field of any NL team yet again. de Aza has only 69 career games above class A in his minor league career. That was last year, when he hit 278/346/374 with Double-A Carolina. Players like this successfully jump to the majors about once every millennium.
  Even worse for the Marlins though, is that de Aza's only competition was Eric Reed and Alex Sanchez. The team's refusal to trade for a real center fielder just goes to show that ownership really doesn't give a damn.
• This year unfortunately marks the last year of Braves baseball on TBS. From now on, TBS will join FOX and ESPN in airing national games, ending their exclusive relationship with the Braves that's existed since the network became a superstation. It will be hard not to mourn, as the season goes on, the end of an era of great baseball broadcasts that I've enjoyed since I was a kid. One can only hope that TBS will keep the same announcers when they move to a multi-team schedule in 2008.
• A short list of notable players beginning the season on the DL: Rafael Furcal, (LAD); Eric Gagne, TEX; Freddy Garcia, PHI; Dan Johnson, OAK; Nick Johnson, WSH; Corey Koskie, MIL; Mark Kotsay, OAK; Cliff Lee, CLE; Jon Lieber, PHI; Esteban Loaiza, OAK; Juan Rivera, LAA; Duaner Sanchez, NYM; Freddy Sanchez, PIT; Mike Timlin, BOS; Chien-Ming Wang, NYY

More baseball to come, thank goodness.

Short notes

Opening Day inches ever closer, and there is excitement in the air. Just a few short new items out of Spring Training:

• IN Demand cable has offered to match Direct TV's bid of $700 million to carry baseball's Extra Innings package, thereby keeping it available to cable subscribers. Since the (premature) announcement that Direct TV would be the exclusive home of out-of-market baseball games, the deal has met with a lot of opposition, not just from common fans, but from government officials. While it still looks like the DirecTV deal will go through, there's still room for hope for the rest of us, and that's good news. Either way, it's encouraging that the fierce negative outcry from the fans actually had some effect on the baseball Lords.
• On the field, it looks like Ken Griffey, Jr. will be moving to right field to start the season. The Reds are apparently making this move because of Griffey's injury, but it's a move that they should have made two or three years ago regardless. Griffey can no longer handle the center field job, and it can't be having a good effect on his health.
  The only problem with this arrangement is that it's doubtful that Griffey will hit well enough by right field standards. In 2005, Griffey compensated for his bad defense by hitting 301/369/576 in 128 games, good even for Cincinnati. But last year, Griffey hit 252/316/486, probably the worst season of his career. A batting line like that isn't bad for center field (even adjusting for the hitter-friendly G.A.B.), but it's dismal for a right fielder. Baseball Prospectus' PECOTA prediction system projects Griffey to hit 275/344/506 this season, a bit better than in 2006. But it also predicts that he'll lose nearly 100 plate appearances due to injuries and age. Putting Griffey in right field would probably help him get more playing time in this system, but it would also drastically reduce his value. A right fielder who hits 275/344/506 in a hitter's park isn't bad, but he's not worth millions either.
  The unfortunate thing is that this is the best the Reds can do. They've got Griffey, and with his contract, he's not going anywhere. This state of affairs may not be very satisfactory, but under the circumstances, the move to right field is the best the Reds can do. It would have been even better if they'd done it a year or two ago.
• In a horrifically familiar turn of events, the Associated Press is reporting that both Kerry Wood and Mark Prior may not be ready in time for Opening Day. Wood strained his right triceps earlier in Spring Training, so his status is doubtful, even as a middle reliever.
  Luckily, the Cubs weren't counting much on a healthy Kerry Wood, whose injury history is legendary. But they were hoping to get a healthy and slightly effective Mark Prior. Prior has struggled in Spring Training, but as Lou Pineilla wisely points out, it's a small and insignificant sample size. The Cubs don't need Prior in the starting rotation right away, not with their fleet of free agents, but it would help. The same AP article notes that Prior has only reached the mid-80's in velocity, which is pretty discouraging.
  If anyone's in the market for a play about star-crossed Cubs, here's the perfect storyline.
• The Red Sox are again shuffling through the deck to look for a closer. When they signed former Mariner Joel Pineiro, it was assumed that they would be converting him into the role. Eventually, even the Red Sox realized how insane that idea was. Last I heard was that they were slotting in Mike Timlin for the role, because he's an old reliable guy who's "been there." Well, the news today is that Timlin will start the season on the DL, scuttling those plans. But then that's probably for the best.
  The Sox are scrambling -- again -- to try and put together something to acquire another closer. There have been rumors about a trade with the Nats for Chad Cordero, but those have been flying around for months. The Giants are shopping around Armando Benitez, but most teams are wisely keeping their distance from him. Oh well. Anything's better than Joel Pineiro.
• The two big unlikely comebacks of Spring Training are progressing fairly well. Sammy Sosa, in camp with Texas, has had a great spring, hitting 417/421/778. Spring stats are notoriously fickle, but this is a good sign for Sosa and the Rangers. Sosa may be pursued by rumors of steroid use, but his experience shouldn't be nearly as bad as Barry Bonds'. If I were the Rangers, I'd be very reluctant to get my hopes up about Sammy. But on a team with a pretty weak outfield and no set DH, there's room for Sammy to make a difference, even as a part-timer.
  The other big comeback is that of Josh Hamilton. Hamilton, formerly of the Devil Rays, is the former star prospect whose life fell apart due to drugs. The Reds got Hamilton in the Rule V draft, hoping he could resurrect some of his former prospect-ness. And so far, Hamilton has been the biggest story in Reds camp by far, hitting 487/543/692 in 14 Spring Training games. But I'm forced to point out what so many others already have -- 14 Spring Training games aren't enough to change our minds about Hamilton. Hamilton has just 89 at-bats above Class A in his entire career, he'll be 26 in May, and he's only played 15 games since 2002.
  To say the odds are against Josh Hamilton would be a hideous understatement. But his "story" is such a great human interest hook that the media has already resurrected him as a success. To be fair, he has been something of a success; to go through what he has and return to baseball at all is a great accomplishment. But it's far, far too early to expect him to produce at the major league level. It's not impossible for someone who used to have great baseball skills to come back from a long layoff and still retain something. But, realistically speaking, I'm more likely to win the lottery.
• Former commissioner Bowie Kuhn passed away last week at age 80. Kuhn's tenure saw more change than arguably any other executive who's held the office. It was under Kuhn that free agency, the amateur draft, and the player's union all came about. Unfortunately, Kuhn is mainly remembered for the futility of his tenure, as he tried and failed to stop most of the changes that took place during the era. In the end, Kuhn managed to alienate both the players' union and his employers, the owners. The union (and Marvin Miller) hated Kuhn for his sense of entitlement and his meddling. The owners, on the other hand, thought Kuhn was too soft on the players and resented his interference in labor disputes. Therefore, there was really no one left to say anything nice about Kuhn.
  This isn't to say that the criticisms of Kuhn weren't valid. And I'm not in favor of whitewashing the records of the recently deceased. But Rob Neyer probably paid Kuhn the best compliment when he said that, all else aside, Kuhn really was looking out for the best interests of the game. He may have interpreted those interests narrowly, and he may have had an overinflated sense of his role in enforcing them, but he was a man who acted with the best of intentions.
  Perhaps the biggest insult to Kuhn was that he was the first real commissioner not inducted into Cooperstown. (Kuhn was preceded by Gen. Spike Eckert, but I think we can all agree that Eckert doesn't really count as a baseball commissioner). However, Kenesaw Mountain Landis, Happy Chandler, and Ford Frick were all enshrined as executives in Cooperstown. It was Kuhn, really, that broke the tradition of honoring former commissioners, and none since Kuhn have been inducted, either. It was an unfortunate insult from the players and the owners towards a man who just tried to do he thought was best.

Back with more soon. Until then, consider the deification of Josh Hamilton by those who should know better.

Baseball Prospectus 2007

Ah, Spring. When a young geek's thoughts turn to the next Baseball Prospectus annual. Last year, I took the opportunity to discuss the annual, including some of their interesting articles and some of their humorous anecdotes. This year's annual is gigantic -- about 100 pages more than the 2006 version. The added bulk comes from more players, more analysis, and more prospects.
The key to Baseball Prospectus is that not only do they provide an excellent statistical overview of the season, they work within a broad framework that allows them to incorporate many different angles and perspectives. I don't agree with everything they have to say, obviously, but I can't dispute the fact that most of what they say is very sensible.
Some of the interesting discussions in this year's annual:

• Keith Woolner, one of the architects of the "Pitcher Abuse Points" stat, revisits the formula behind it by incorporating the broad play-by-play data now available.
• Will Carroll and Jay Jaffe study the use of amphetamines in baseball, looking at the ban that went into effect before the 2006 season.
• New addition to BP Kevin Goldstein rates the top 100 prospects in baseball. Goldstein represents a more hybrid scouting/stats writer with a specialty in prospects. His addition to the BP staff offers them a much broader perspective on these issues (Goldstein's #1 is, no surprise, Alex Gordon of the Royals).
• In the team-by-team essays, the BP staff discusses the tougher challenge faced by Billy Beane in the new, smarter baseball environment; the bold and productive rebuilding process run by Dave Dombrowski in Detroit; the success of the new youth movement in Arizona, etc. They also do an excellent job of succinctly tearing the Pirates organization a new bunghole. "It is important to note just how obtuse the management of personnel in this organization can be," they say, before finishing their remarks with this statement:
  There is not even a pretense of trying, perhaps not even of caring. The organization is a hollow shell, extant only because of a few age-old reasons; Baseball has roots in this city going back to the 1880s, the league requires an even number of teams to keep the schedule manageable, and someone was dumb enough to build them a stadium. The only rational response to the Pirates' apathy is apathy.

My main problem with this year's annual isn't so much the content as the editing. The book was one month late shipping, arriving in early March after an announced release date of early February. One would think that this would allow them to catch any glaring inconsistencies, but this is not so. For every player listed in the book, there is a series of stats, along with the PECOTA forecast for 2007, and a short paragraph of commentary. The problem is that the commentary doesn't match the numbers. Apparently, the editors decided to update the PECOTA entries at the last minute, without realizing that this would also change the commentary. There are about a dozen players whose text references numbers or players in their PECOTA forecasts who aren't there. It takes the reader a while to catch up when the text refers to a player's top 4 comparables by name, even though the 4 actually listed above are quite different. I do like up-to-the-minute accuracy, but I much prefer when the two parts of a player's entry actually match. I'm willing to forgive a few typos, but this was a pretty glaring problem.

All that aside, the book is worth reading (as always) and is the best baseball annual out there by a mile. I'll finish with a few examples of the BP humor. They overdid it a bit this year with the geeky references, but there were still some good laughs:

LaTroy Hawkins: "If dogs come home to die, and cats leave, pitchers go to Colorado. The $3.5 million the Rockies will pay for the privilege seems like a lot for a shovel and a hole."

Denny Bautista: "In one of his rare good starts in 2006, he induced 16 groundball outs in six innings. That's what the Rockies are after, but they might as well try to catch love in a butterfly net or spend 60 years teaching a pigeon to peck out 'Turkey in the Straw' on the xylophone in the hopes that it might one day play 'The Goldberg Variations.'"

Mike DeJean: "DeJean has made it known that he wants to retire as a Rocky, marking him as a man of singularly low ambition."

Ray King: Okay, BP didn't have much to say about him. But I still can't get over this resemblance.

Juan Morillo: "If you took him to the carnival and had him throw for the speed guns there, he could win you a lot of teddy bears . . . The Rockies will likely try him in the bullpen to see if they can harness his arm for more than just an array of stuffed octopodes."

Jayson Nix: "Jayson Nix has never adjusted to hitting in the upper levels of the minors. He and brother Laynce are both in danger of washing out of baseball due to a lack of strike zone recognition, but once they do, they could always donate their extra Y's to needy minor leaguers."

Jason Vargas: " Even though the Marlins had a really nice date with him in 2005, Vargas found himself buried in the pitching staff's Little Black Book last year. So, whatever, he totally didn't need them, and if Florida did decide to call, he'd let it ring a few times before picking up so as not to seem desperate. So what if he had a little walk trouble this year? Do you break up with someone over a few extra walks? Do you? And don't give him the whole 'It's not you, it's us; we just need more time to think' thing. He totally tried to be himself last year, and if he came off as something other than what he was, then so what? That's not his fault, right? The Mets called and asked for him by name, so he's with them now. Only when the Marlins finally come to town, it's going to be, like, so awkward."

Lance Berkman: "Berkman would like everyone to know that he hates the 'Fat Elvis' nickname some have tried to hang on him. He's right, too -- fat Elvis didn't have this many hits."

Terrence Long: "When Terrence Long was called up, Torre said, 'He brings us experience and has base-stealing ability. He's got some things that can probably help us.' Torre had gotten Terrence confused with Herman Long of the Boston Beaneaters. T-Long packed a lot of not hitting and poor fielding into 12 games. Herman, being quite dead, would have done less harm."

Carlos Lee: "If at some point during the season the Astros suddenly and unexpectedly put Chris Burke on the DL, it might not be that he's hurt, but that Lee ate him."

17 days 'til Opening Day.

2007 AL West Predictions

AL WEST:

Los Angeles Angels (94-68) 92-96 win range

Oakland Athletics (92-70) 90-94 win range

Texas Rangers (84-78) 82-86 win range

Seattle Mariners (72-90) 70-74 win range

LOS ANGELES ANGELS

2006 W-L Record: 89-73 (2nd)

2006 pW-pL Record: 84-78

2007 Projection: 94-68

Strengths: Pitching staff; young hitters, Vlad Guerrero
Weaknesses: Impact hitters; offensive depth

Biggest Change from '06: Their top rookies are either in the majors (Weaver, Kendrick) or getting close (Wood)

One Reason:

One Reason the Angels will win in '07 is that their pitching staff is top-notch. The Angels are heading into 2007 with probably the best starting rotation staff in the league. They don't have a big ace (although John Lackey is underrated), but they've got several guys strongly above-average, such as Lackey, Jered Weaver, Kelvim Escobar and Ervin Santana. Bartolo Colon will take the #5 spot, and although he has the potential to perform well, it's doubtful given his health status. Either way, the Angels' starting rotation should give them a chance to win every night, even with their offense.

One Reason the Angels will lose in '07 is -- speaking of that offense . . . The Angels' lineup consists of Vlad Guerrero and a lot of hope. Their other veterans are either expensive guys who are vaguely productive (Gary Matthews, Jr., Orlando Cabrera) or guys with little left to offer (Garret Anderson, Shea Hillenbrand). They do have some quality guys like Juan Rivera and Chone Figgins who have already established themselves in the majors. But the lineup will succeed or fail based on the success of the young talent. And judging from the past couple years, that's not much to hang your hat on.

Notes:

While I'm less than bullish about the Angel's offense, I think their pitching staff can carry them to October. And Mike Scioscia has been able to win with some thin, slap-happy lineups in the past (though none quite this bad).
The other reason I'm picking the Angels to win the division is that I think they're better than the A's, the only other contender in the AL West. Oakland has a more well-rounded ballclub and is certainly capable of repeating as division champions, but they're a worse team than they were last year and still have a lot of questions surrounding their roster, particularly in terms of injuries. So I'm picking the Angels to win by default.

OAKLAND ATHLETICS

2006 W-L Record: 93-69 (1st)
2006 pW-pL Record: 85-77
2007 Projection: 92-70
Strengths: Well-rounded roster; pitching depth

Weaknesses: Thin offense; few star pitchers
Biggest Change from '06: The loss of Barry Zito, followed closely by the loss of Frank Thomas
One Reason:
One Reason the A's will win in '07 is that they've done a great job of overcoming obstacles over the past seven years or so, and there's no better example than 2006. They had a disappointing lineup then with lots of injuries. They also had a pitching staff with good depth, but no real stars. They beat out the Angels last year despite these flaws, and they're perfectly capable of doing it again this year.

One Reason the A's will lose in '07 is that they're just not as good as they were last year, and they can't keep pace with the Angels by moving backwards. I completely agree that Barry Zito is overrated, but he's still a hard guy to replace in your rotation (although a healthy Rich Harden would help). Frank Thomas was an offensive star last year, and it's hard to see the A's making up for his loss, even with the signing of Mike Piazza.
Notes:

The A's would get a big boost if they could keep even half of last year's walking wounded healthy this year. Rich Harden is priority #1, but they also lost a lot when their middle infield went down (as evidenced in the playoffs, when they started D'Angelo Jimenez at second base). Marco Scutaro is a great backup, but he shouldn't be getting more than 300 at bats.
The A's are also counting on some declining stars to fill in the gaps. There's little chance of Jason Kendall or Mark Kotsay turning things around for a career year, even though they're two guys who can at least be counted upon to stay healthy. Esteban Loaiza wasn't that bad in 2006, but he's not going to fill Barry Zito's shoes.
No, as much as I think the A's will be competitive, I don't see them making the postseason.

TEXAS RANGERS

2006 W-L Record: 80-82 (3rd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 86-76
2007 Projection: 84-78
Strengths: Infield offense; stabilized pitching staff

Weaknesses: Outfield offense; quality and depth of pitching staff
Biggest Change from '06: Nothing significant, other than switching out John Danks for Brandon McCarthy
One Reason:
One Reason the Rangers will win in '07 is that the Angels and A's engage in an on-field brawl that results in full-season suspensions for all 50 players involved.

One Reason the Rangers will lose in '07 is that they're simply not as good as the Angels or A's. Their offense is strong, but not as strong as the ballpark makes it seem. The Rangers are still running out a bare outfield, and they can't count on a lot of production from catcher (Laird) or third base (Blalock) either. Their pitching staff is improving, but it's still not good enough to push this team much past .500.
Notes:

The Rangers will have a tough time simply maintaining what they accomplished last year. Granted, there is room for improvement; Brad Wilkerson and Mark Teixeira should have better years, and the addition of Brandon McCarthy gives the team a reliable #3 for the first time in recent memory. But although this team is taking baby steps forward, they're still not really contenders.

SEATTLE MARINERS

2006 W-L Record: 78-84 (4th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 78-84
2007 Projection: 72-90
Strengths: Infield corners; Outfield; Rotation depth

Weaknesses: Power; Rotation quality; Middle relief
Biggest Change from '06: Added depth of Miguel Batista and Jeff Weaver
One Reason:
One Reason the Mariners will win in '07 is by forfeit.

One Reason the Mariners will lose in '07 is if they just keep doing what they've been doing.
Notes:

I may be too pessimistic about the Mariners. Yes, they improved their starting rotation in the offseason (but at what cost?). And yeah, their offense isn't that bad. Or is it? Really, they've got a star in Ichiro, a few solid players (Sexson, Beltre, Johjima, Ibanez) and then nada. Adding in Jose Guillen and Jose Vidro isn't going to help anything.
And it should be said that the Mariners gave up Rafael Soriano for nothing (viz: Horacio Ramirez), thereby hurting their middle relief prospects. And while the M's did improve their rotation, it was pretty bad to begin with, and no one would call Miguel Batista and Jeff Weaver money in the bank.

GM Bill Bavasi was trying to save his job, and I doubt it will result in much headway out on the field.

2007 AL Central Predictions

AL CENTRAL

Cleveland Indians (94-68) 92-96 win range

*Minnesota Twins (93-69) 91-95 win range

Detroit Tigers (90-72) 88-92 win range

Chicago White Sox (88-74) 86-90 win range

Kansas City Royals (63-99) 61-65 win range

CLEVELAND INDIANS

2006 W-L Record: 78-84 (4th)

2006 pW-pL Record: 89-73

2007 Projection: 94-68

Strengths: Offense, Pitching depth

Weaknesses: Rotation star quality; Bullpen

Biggest Change from '06: Not a lot; full year of Jeremy Sowers, Josh Barfield at second base, stronger outfield offense

One Reason:

One Reason the Indians will win in '07 is that they were good enough to win it the last two years, but had everything go wrong for them. There's a strong possibility that there's more than bad luck to this, but you can't deny the Indians' big-time talent.

One Reason the Indians will lose in '07 is that their pitching staff is the 4th-best in their division. They've got several solid guys in the rotation, but no real ace and a lot of questions at the back of the pack (Paul Byrd?). Their bullpen is a work in progress once again, and could prove to be the difference between making the postseason and finishing just short -- which would be an eerie repeat of 2005.

Notes:

The Indians have a top-notch, solid young offense. They've got impact players in Travis Hafner, Grady Sizemore, and Victor Martinez. They've also added a stronger supporting cast, especially in the outfield, where the addition of Trot Nixon and David Dellucci should add strong depth at a reasonable price. There's also some high hopes for Ryan Garko at first base, if he ends up in the role full-time.

MINNESOTA TWINS

2006 W-L Record: 96-66 (1st)
2006 pW-pL Record: 93-69
2007 Projection: 93-69
Strengths: Impact players; young pitching, Johan Santana
Weaknesses: Offensive depth, back end of rotation
Biggest Change from '06: No Francisco Liriano
One Reason:
One Reason the Twins will win in '07 is they are, all-around, one of the strongest clubs in baseball. Each of their weaknesses is somewhat compensated for. The lack of experience of their young pitchers is compensated for by the fact that there are several of them, and each of them has very good potential. There's also Johan Santana, the superstar rock of the pitching world. Their lack of offensive depth is made up for by the presence of MVP-caliber players such as Joe Mauer and Justin Morneau.

One Reason the Twins will lose in '07 is that they just barely made the playoffs last year, and it's hard to believe that they're a better team this year. They've lost Francisco Liriano, an excellent pitcher, and will have to deal with the likely regression of hitters such as Michael Cuddyer, Nick Punto, and Justin Bartlett. It will be very hard to bridge this gap in a division where there's no room for taking a step back.
Notes:

The Twins have a good chance to stay in the race all season, and in my opinion, they've got what it takes to win the Wild Card. This isn't without a few caveats; I'm counting on some strong performances from the Twins' young starters (Garza, Bonser, etc.) as well as a strong lineup up and down the order. It's a lot to ask for, but I think that with Santana, Mauer, and Morneau, they've got a head start on everybody else.

DETROIT TIGERS

2006 W-L Record: 95-67 (2nd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 95-67
2007 Projection: 90-72
Strengths: Young pitching; power
Weaknesses: Patience; Fluke factor
Biggest Change from '06: Gary Sheffield: power + patience in one surly package
One Reason:
One Reason the Tigers will win in '07 is that they could end up winning just as they did in 2006 -- with dominant pitching and big power. There's room for improvement, with Gary Sheffield added and Joel Zumaya (hopefully) closing by season's end. If Placido Polanco and Carlos Guillen can stay healthy, the Tigers will contend.

One Reason the Tigers will lose in '07 is that there's also a lot of room for regression. Like the Twins, the Tigers got into the playofffs last year by a nose, and it's not clear that they've improved a lot in the offseason. Adding Sheffield helps, but he's getting more and more brittle, and his MVP days are probably behind him. There's a lot of room for regression in the rotation, too, with Justin Verlander entering an uncertain sophomore season, Kenny Rogers another year older, and guys like Nate Robertson and Mark Maroth not exactly inspiring confidence.
Notes:

Unlike the Twins, the Tigers don't have any real impact players, and neither do they have the same farm systen depth to compensate for underachievers. It's a close call, but I'm picking the Tigers to just miss the playoffs.

CHICAGO WHITE SOX

2006 W-L Record: 90-72 (3rd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 88-74
2007 Projection: 88-74
Strengths: Pitching durability, power
Weaknesses: Lineup holes, Thinned-out rotation
Biggest Change from '06: Loss of Freddy Garcia
One Reason:
One Reason the White Sox will win in '07 is that they're a well-rounded ballclub. They've got a pretty good bullpen with a good (if volatile) closer, a good starting rotation that goes deep into ballgames, and several legitimate offensive threats.

One Reason the White Sox will lose in '07 is that they've taken a step back from '06. Replacing Freddy Garcia with Gavin Floyd is a loss in the short-term, and there are still big questions surrounding Juan Uribe's ability to play every day while facing murder charges in the Dominican. With John Danks, Ryan Sweeney, and Josh Fields, the Sox have the impact players to step in and produce in the majors. But there's just not much evidence that the Sox are significant better than they were in 2006. And in this division, treading water just isn't enough.
Notes:

The Sox are a pretty reliable 85-90 win team, but it's tough to project beyond that. Any scenario that sees them winning more than 90 games requires a rebound by starters Mark Buehrle and Jon Garland as well as solid production from their young prospects.

KANSAS CITY ROYALS

2006 W-L Record: 62-100 (5th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 63-99
2007 Projection: 63-99
Strengths: Young hitters
Weaknesses: The entire pitching staff, skilled defensive positions
Biggest Change from '06: The ascension of Alex Gordon
One Reason:

One Reason the Royals will win in '07 is that their hitting prospects reach the majors and make an immediate impact.

One Reason the Royals will lose in '07 is that their pitching staff is abysmal and not likely to get much better.
Notes:

The Gil Meche contract is what everyone will be focusing on this year. And once it goes down in flames, we'll be able to move on and look at the mess that is the Royals' pitching staff. With their young hitters, the Royals have the chance to field a league-average offense quite soon. But there's little prospect for improvement in their pitching staff, which is probably why management got desperate and signed Meche. And while Meche is a notch above the other Royal starters, that's a very dubious honor.

We'll finish up with the NL West soon.

2007 American League Predictions

AL EAST:
New York Yankees (96-66) 94-98 win range
Boston Red Sox (91-71) 89-93 win range
Toronto Blue Jays (88-74) 86-90 win range
Baltimore Orioles (75-87) 73-77 win range
Tampa Bay Devil Rays (69-93) 67-71 win range

AL CENTRAL:
Cleveland Indians (94-68) 92-96 win range
*Minnesota Twins (93-69) 91-95 win range
Detroit Tigers (90-72) 88-92 win range
Chicago White Sox (88-74) 86-90 win range
Kansas City Royals (63-99) 61-65 win range

AL WEST:
Los Angeles Angels (94-68) 92-96 win range
Oakland Athletics (92-70) 90-94 win range
Texas Rangers (84-78) 82-86 win range
Seattle Mariners (72-90) 70-74 win range

AL MVP: Travis Hafner, Indians

AL CY YOUNG: Johan Santana, Twins

AL ROOKIE OF THE YEAR: Alex Gordon, Royals

ALCS: Yankees over Indians

WS: Yankees over Dodgers

AL EAST

NEW YORK YANKEES

2006 W-L Record: 97-65 (1st)

2006 pW-pL Record: 95-67

2007 Projection: 96-66

Strengths: Offense, disposable cash

Weaknesses: Rotation star quality; bullpen depth; first base

Biggest Change from '06: Kei Igawa

One Reason:
One reason the Yankees will win in '07 is the same reason they've won for years: a strong offense supports a merely capable pitching staff.
One reason the Yankees will lose in '07 is that their lineup isn't as strong as it looks. Everyone's getting older, and replacing Gary Sheffield with Doug Mientkiewicz is pretty significant. The same could be said of their rotation, with questions surrounding Andy Pettite, Chien-Ming Wang, and Kei Igawa, not to mention whomever fills in at 5th starter until Phillip Hughes comes up. Switching out Randy Johnson for Igawa at least gives them fewer age-related issues.

Notes:

The Yankees are, as always, strong favorites to reach October. For all the questions and concerns there are surrounding the Yankees, we have to remember that the Yanks have similar issues every season for a while now and have still managed to weather the storm and make the postseason. They've got the money, they've got Phillip Hughes, and they've got a much better-run front office with Brian Cashman calling the shots. It will be a tighter race than it was last year, but I think the Bombers still have the edge.

BOSTON RED SOX

2006 W-L Record: 86-76 (3rd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 81-81
2007 Projection: 95-67
Strengths: Impact hiters, pitching depth, Dice-K
Weaknesses: Bullpen, offensive depth
Biggest Change from '06: Dice-K
One Reason:
One Reason the BoSox will win in '07 is that they've got the impact hitters and the impact pitchers. The supporting cast may not be what it was in 2004, but they've got Manny & Papi in the lineup and Schilling-Matsuzaka-Papelbon-Beckett in the rotation.

One Reason the BoSox will lose in '07 is because their supporting cast really is an issue. The Sox' batting order is strong 1-6 (Lugo, Youkilis, Papi, Manny, Drew, Lowell), but they've got big questions surrounding Jason Varitek, Coco Crisp, and Dustin Pedroia. If those three come through, then the Sox could have the best offense in the league. But if even two of them come up empty, then the Sox will struggle like they did down the stretch last year. The same is true in the bullpen, where Joel Pineiro (I'm still convinced this is a crazy plan) is anchoring a less-than-stellar lot.
Notes:

(If you read my NL entry and wonder what happened to my prediction that the Sox would win the Series, I changed my mind when I started preparing this entry. Ask me again tomorrow and I may change my mind, but with Boston's bullpen troubles and lineup holes, I don't think they can beat out the Twins, White Sox, A's and maybe even Tigers).

Just like last year, the Sox are a volatile team. If everything goes right, from Matsuzaka's debut to Schilling's conditioning, to Beckett's homers, to Papelbon's transition, to Drew's health, to Crisp's recovery, to Pedroia's debut, to Pineiro's role change, then the Sox are contenders. But that's a whole lot of conditions to meet, and the Sox will have to meet nearly all of them to win the Wild Card.
That 2006 Pythagorean record scares me. Have the Sox really added 15 true wins this offseason?

TORONTO BLUE JAYS

2006 W-L Record: 87-75 (2nd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 86-76
2007 Projection: 88-74
Strengths: Star pitchers, middle of the order
Weaknesses: Back of rotation, middle infield
Biggest Change from '06: Frank Thomas
One Reason:

One Reason the Jays will win in '07 is that they keep anything big from going wrong. Their offense looks strong, and while they're getting zero production from the middle infield, they should be pretty potent none the less, especially when Adam Lind gets a full-time job. Their rotation isn't very impressive after Halladay and Burnett, but the Jays have several guys (Chacin, Thomson, Ohka) who can at least keep the team in games. The Blue Jays may survive not because they're better than the other teams, but because they have much less potential to suck.

One Reason the Jays will lose in '07 is that they're in the wrong league. It used to be that they were in the wrong division, but with the ascension of the AL Central and the A's-Angels twin towers out west, the Jays aren't going to catch any breaks when it comes to reaching the postseason. It's highly unlikely that the Jays will be the best team in their division, which means they're going to have to compete against four or five other teams in the Wild Card race who are just as good and probably better.
Notes:

The Jays did finish second last year and show promising improvement that's supported by the Pythagorean numbers. It wouldn't be a terrific surprise if they won 95 games, but they're much less likely to do it than most teams in the race.

BALTIMORE ORIOLES:

2006 W-L Record: 70-92 (4th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 69-93
2007 Projection: 75-87
Strengths: Young Pitching, Nick Markakis, Miguel Tejada
Weaknesses: Everything else
Biggest Change from '06: A full season of Nick Markakis
One Reason:
One Reason the Orioles will win in '07 is they go see the opera "Faust" and get an idea.

One Reason the Orioles will lose in '07 . . . one reason?
Notes:

It's not the like the Orioles aren't doing anything right. They've graduated some quality arms to the big leagues and have an impact player in right fielder Nick Markakis. But after Tejada, Brian Roberts and Ramon Hernandez, the lineup is pretty drab. Plus there are no guarantees about the potency of their young pitchers, especially Daniel Cabrera. Their farm system has some gems at the lower levels but no one ready to fill holes in the big leagues. There's no reason to expect the Orioles to contend in the near future.

TAMPA BAY DEVIL RAYS

2006 W-L Record: 61-101
2006 pW-pL Record: 65-97
2007 Projection: 69-93
Strengths: Young hitters, farm system
Weaknesses: Pitching staff, mismanagement of prospects, general sucktitude
Biggest Change from '06: (Hopefully) Getting B.J. Upton and Delmon Young in the majors
One Reason:
One Reason the Rays will win in '07 is that their offensive prospects step in and add potency to a depressingly bad lineup. Even with Carl Crawford and a healthy Rocco Baldelli, the '06 Rays finished a distant last in runs scored (4.25 R/G) in the AL. There's a long way to go before they can become a real threat, but they've got the top-notch talent (Upton, Young, Akinori Iwamura) to make a significant impact right away.

One Reason the Rays will lose in '07 is that their pitching staff is equally awful, but with little prospect for improvement. The Rays finished 12th out of 14 AL teams in runs allowed last year (5.28 RA/G). Part of that is due to a bad defense, yes, but even so, there are no saviors in the farm system to help them out here. There is some hope, but nothing like a B.J. Upton or Delmon Young.
Notes:

Even if the Rays' offense skyrockets up to 4th or 5th place in the league, their pitching is still so bad that it wouldn't guarantee them more than 80 wins or so. The 2007 version of the Devil Rays could be the best ever for the franchise, but that standard is so woefully low that it's hard to get excited about.

Back later with the AL Central.

He deserved this.

2007 NL West Predictions

NL WEST:
Los Angeles Dodgers (94-68) 92-96 win range
Arizona Diamondbacks (85-77) 83-87 win range
San Diego Padres (84-78) 82-86 win range
Colorado Rockies (78-84) 76-80 win range
San Francisco Giants (73-89) 71-75 win range

LOS ANGELES DODGERS
2006 W-L Record: 88-74 (2nd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 88-74
2007 Projection: 94-68
Strengths: Farm system; young contributors; pitching staff
Weaknesses: Useless old guys blocking young studs; organizational indifference to prospects
Biggest Change from '06: Jason Schmidt
One Reason:
One reason the Dodgers will win in '07 is that their excellent roster is supplemented by top-notch, major league-ready talent.
One reason the Dodgers will lose in '07 is their misappopriation of playing time. Juan Pierre and Luis Gonzalez shouldn't be playing much at all on a team that has so many young possibilities in the outfield. We can only hope that GM Ned Colletti doesn't further damage his team's future in exchange for dubious returns.
Notes:
They're not without some serious questions, but I think the Dodgers are the best team in the NL going into 2007. As I've said before, I'm encouraged by their depth and their ability to replace injured players or non-entities with quality guys.
The Dodgers are in a very competitive division and certainly won't have any easy time of it. But If I had to pick two teams that I expect to make the playoffs, it would be the Dodgers and Mets.

ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS
2006 W-L Record: 76-86 (T-4th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 80-82
2007 Projection: 85-77
Strengths: Outfield; Farm system; Stephen Drew, Brandon Webb
Weaknesses: Pitching Depth; Bullpen
Biggest Change from '06: Great prospects finally graduating to the majors
One Reason:
One Reason the D-Backs will win in '07 is that they've got as much raw talent as any team in the league.
One Reason the D-Backs will lose in '07 is that it's questionable whether they can make use of that talent. The offense is mostly young, and it's hard to predict how fast they'll get used to the big leagues. Their pitchers are questionable for different reasons. Livan Hernandez handles a great workload, but is coming off two down years and is moving into a hitter's park. Randy Johnson is still Randy Johnson, just an older, more rickety version. And the back end of the rotation (Doug Davis, Enrique Gonzalez) has some promise but isn't very reliable.
Notes:
I mentioned before that the D-Backs have a broader win range than I've listed. They could realistically finish anywhere between 75 and 90 wins, and perhaps beyond that. They're a team of great talent (especially going forward), but the talent is much more volatile than that of the Dodgers. So I've pencilled in the D-Backs for second place.

SAN DIEGO PADRES
2006 W-L Record: 88-74 (1st)
2006 pW-pL Record: 86-76
2007 Projection: 84-78
Strengths: Pitching Staff; Defense
Weaknesses: Lineup Depth
Biggest Change from '06: Jake Peavy at full strength
One Reason:
One Reason the Padres will win in '07 is that they are reliably good. Their ceiling isn't nearly as high as that of Arizona, but you can predict with some certainty that they'll win 80-some games and stay in the Wild Card race for a while.
One Reason the Padres will lose in '07 is their lack of upside. The Dodgers are going to be setting a high standard in the West. Other than Peavy, there are no real "difference-makers" in San Diego. Brian and Marcus Giles aren't really difference-makers anymore, and neither are pitchers David Wells, Greg Maddux, and Trevor Hoffman (to a lesser extent). The rest of the team is rounded out by solid players such as Mike Cameron, Adrian Gonzalez, Chris Young, and Scott Linebrink. They've got good depth, but there's just little reason to expect this team to break through to 90 wins.
Notes:
The biggest thing to watch here is Jake Peavy. Peavy struggled a bit last week, but if you look into it, a lot of his struggles weren't really his fault. He's still a strong candidate for the Cy Young Award and a good bet to notch 200 Ks.
Another boost would be if Mike Cameron and the Giles brothers played a bit like their older selves. The Padres aren't out of the postseason race entirely, but it just takes a lot of "ifs" and "maybes" to make them sound like contenders.

COLORADO ROCKIES
2006 W-L Record: 76-86 (T-4th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 81-81
2007 Projection: 78-84
Strengths: Young talent; Good offseason moves; Rotation stability; Closer
Weaknesses: Inexperience; Rotation mediocrity
Biggest Change from '06: Youngsters are one year better
One Reason:
One reason the Rockies will win in '07 is that they don't have a really striking weakness. Their lineup is surprisingly potent, if short on impact players. Their rotation is strong but also lacking in impact guys. Their bullpen is fair, but they've got a good closer. They've got several young players reaching the majors with good upside. It's a long shot to expect the Rockies to approach 90 wins, but stranger things have happened.
One reason the Rockies won't win in '07 is that they're in the wrong division. Most of the things they have going for them -- the addition of young, impact players -- can also be said of their chief rivals in L.A. and Arizona. And you could argue that the Dodgers' players have more big-league seasoning and that the D-Backs' players have a higher upside. This means that even if the Rockies do succeed in forming a competitive, well-rounded team for the first time in team history, it might not get them much better than 3rd place.
Notes:
Unlike some commentators, I liked the Rockies' pick-up of Willy Taveras. Taveras has his shortcomings in that he's a weak hitter with an empty average whose strongest suit is defense. But the Rockies don't have a better candidate for CF sitting around. And I think that the rest of the lineup will generate enough pop that they can live with Taveras' offensive issues, especially since he's a great defender.
Two rookies that will likely open the season in the starting lineup are Chris Iannetta (C) and Troy Tulowitzki (SS). Both are very good prospects with the chance to be quite productive and soon. Their performance will go a long way toward making or breaking the Rockies. That's not even considering other prospects such as Jeff Baker who should reach the majors in '07.

SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS
2006 W-L Record: 76-85 (3rd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 76-85
2007 Projection: 73-89
Strengths: The Two Barrys and Matt Cain
Weaknesses: Everybody else
Biggest Change from '06: A free agent exodus leaves the lineup stripped bare.
One Reason:
One reason the Giants win in '07 is that they find a way to clone Barry Bonds 8 times.
One reason the Giants will lose in '07 is that their best-case scenario is about 80-82 wins. Best-case. Worst case is finishing 30 games out of first place.
Notes:
In the NL West, you have three teams -- L.A., Arizona, and Colorado -- on the way up. You've got one team -- San Diego -- who's treading water. And one team -- the Giants -- who are inches away from falling off a cliff. Instead of solving the small problems a few years ago and taking a hit in the short term, the Giants leveraged everything they had into winning in the next few years. Not only did they take this huge risk, but the decisions they made did little to help them on their quest for World Series gold. Instead, their desperation led to signing desperate contracts, some of which have been passable, but many of which have been a total waste. If the Giants had rebuilt around 2004 or 2005, they would have suffered losing seasons in 2005-6 but would be nearing competitiveness in a year or so. As it is, they still lost in 2005 and 2006 with no future hope to compensate. Instead, once this current team dissolves, the Giants will be all but lost on the field. They will have only the skeletal remains of a major league team, with a painfully thin minor league system to support it.
Let this be a lesson to those who wish to sacrifice the long-term for the short-term.

On to the American League this weekend.

2007 NL Central Predictions

• I thought I should tell you that Blogger is now offering a "widget" to anyone who upgrades to Blogger Beta. I've e-mailed the company, and hopefully that will be the end of this indecency.

To recap:

NL CENTRAL:
St. Louis Cardinals (86-76) 84-88 win range
Milwaukee Brewers (83-79) 81-85 win range
Chicago Cubs (78-84) 76-80 win range
Cincinnati Reds (78-84) 76-80 win range
Houston Astros (75-87) 73-77 win range
Pittsburgh Pirates (69-93) 67-71 win range

ST. LOUIS CARDINALS
2006 W-L Record: 83-78 (1st)
2006 pW-pL Record: 82-79
2007 Projection: 86-76
Strengths: Core contributors still best in league; good management team
Weaknesses: Injuries; back of rotation, corner outfield, middle infield
Biggest Change from 2006: Nothing really; Jeff Suppan's loss isn't that big
One Reason:
One reason the Cardinals will win in '07 is that they've got arguably the best hitter (Albert Pujols) and the best pitcher (Chris Carpenter) in the league. They've also got Scott Rolen and Jim Edmonds, hopefully still in one piece. Add in two promising young starters (Anthony Reyes and Adam Wainwright), and you've got hope in a winnable division. Okay, that's not one reason, but it's one series of reasons.
One reason the Cardinals will lose in '07 is that their depth has disappeared. Beyond their superstars (who are all injury risks), there's a steep dropoff to the next level of players: capable, unspectacular sorts like David Eckstein and Adam Kennedy. The same is true of the rotation, where the Cards really need Reyes and Wainwright to contribute to fill out the five spots. I would say that a lack of depth means the Cards won't be winning the World Series, but I won't make that mistake again. Let's just say that it really won't happen two years in a row.
Notes:
The Cards have, in my opinion, the best team and the best-run organization in the NL Central. They won the division (and -- gulp -- the World Series) last year despite some dreadful shortcomings. While the Cards haven't gotten a lot better, neither has anyone else in the division. I think the Cards can expect some improvement over last year, and while it's possible that the Brewers can get it together in time to catch them, I wouldn't bet on it.

MILWAUKEE BREWERS
2006 W-L Record: 75-87 (4th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 71-91
2007 Projection: 83-79
Strengths: Good, young offense; Depth across the diamond
Weaknesses: Pitching in general; Ben Sheets' health
Biggest Change from '06: If the Brewers are lucky, a healthy Ben Sheets. If not . . . well, maybe the ushers will start wearing different vests.
One Reason:
One Reason the Brewers will win in '07 is they've already got the talent to do it. I have no doubt that the Brewers are capable of winning the NL Central (getting there is, of course, a different story). But the Brewers have a strong offense, and while their pitching staff is a bit patchy, it will be a lot better off if we see a healthy Ben Sheets.
One Reason the Brewers will lose in '07 is that everything I just said was also true last year, and it didn't stop them from finishing 71-91. The Brewers need to keep all their stars healthy and productive (Sheets, J.J. Hardy) and will need their rookies to step it up (Fielder and Weeks especially were good, but not that good).
Notes:
As I said before, Milwaukee has the roster to win a very winnable division. But it's like herding cats getting all these kids on the field and productive. I'm usually a big fan of GM Doug Melvin, but I don't think he's done the best of jobs this past year. The Carlos Lee trade wasn't particularly helpful, and neither was the Johnny Estrada trade with Arizona. There should be reason for optimism in Milwaukee, but not enough to cancel that October cruise.

CHICAGO CUBS
2006 W-L Record: 66-96 (6th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 70-92
2007 Projection: 78-84
Strengths: Hitting Prospects; Corner Infield
Weaknesses: Starting Pitching; Middle Infield
Biggest Change from '06: The Tribune Co.'s wallet now weighs as much as David Eckstein
One Reason:
One Reason the Cubs will win in '07 is that everything went wrong last year; that can't happen two years in a row. But just so you know -- I said the same thing last spring and was really proven wrong.
One Reason the Cubs will lose in '07 is that they've spent a gi-normous amount of money without really solving most of their problems. They've got a glut of players in the outfield, only half of whom are worth having, they've got far too many middle infielders than they can play, but then they probably shouldn't be playing that much either. They brought in two pitchers (Ted Lilly and Jason Marquis) that improve their starting rotation somewhat, but not nearly proportional to their cut of the payroll. Barring a trade, they've completely blocked most of their major-league ready prospects for the foreseeable future. They tried to fix a low-OBP, strikeout-heavy offense by bringing in the patron saint of poor plate discipline, Alfonso Soriano.
Only in a really unlikely scenario do the Cubs make it to October.
Notes:
I guess I vented my spleen there in the last comment.
But everyone thinks the Cubs have really improved this offseason. I think they've improved, too, but I'm not about to list them as contenders, as others have done. I've even heard some say that the Cubs are "favorites" in the NL Central. I've already dispensed with the notion that the Cubs have gotten a lot better. I think that this misplaced euphoria is the product of two things: One, that the only thing stronger than a sportswriter's cynicism is his blinding optimism concern his team, and two, that people have a really over-inflated opinion of Alfonso Soriano.
The Cubs will be lucky -- very lucky -- to win 80 games.

CINCINNATI REDS
2006 W-L Record: 80-82 (3rd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 76-86
2007 Projection: 78-84
Strengths: 1-2 starters; Adam Dunn, Edwin Encarnacion & Homer Bailey
Weaknesses: Back of rotation; bullpen; infield; upper management
Biggest Change from '06: Very little has changed, except that Austin Kearns and Felipe Lopez are gone
One Reason:
One Reason that the Reds will win in '07 is . . . they have magic powers?
One Reason that the Reds will lose in '07 is that there's just not enough here to cobble together more than 82 wins, even with a good front office. All things considered, the Reds will be lucky to scrape their way up to .500
Notes:
The Reds are basically the same team they were last year, except that Ken Griffey, Jr. (and all their relievers) are a year older and nearing retirement. They also won't have Kearns & Lopez for the few months they had them last year. And the odds that Bronson Arroyo will pitch like a Cy Young contender again is remote.
With all these players declining, who's going to be the one to help the Reds break even, let alone improve? Homer Bailey is a big hope. The problem is that because the Reds are so bad and Bailey is so good, they're starting to prepare for his arrival like he's the Messiah. That never ends well, for either the fans or the player, especially.

HOUSTON ASTROS
2006 W-L Record: 82-80 (2nd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 83-79
2007 Projection: 75-87
Strengths: Infield Corners, Roy Oswalt
Weaknesses: Gaping holes in lineup; hapless back of the rotation
Biggest Change from '06: Willy Taveras and Andy Pettite weren't great, but an 80-win team still can't afford to lose them
One Reason:
One reason that the Astros will win in '07 is that maybe they can fool the umpires by giving Lance Berkman a bunch of wigs and letting him take up 6 spots in the order.
One reason that the Astros will lose in '07 is that their only strong weapon was their pitching, and it's just not anymore there like it was.
Notes:
The Astros are another one of those teams whose win range is really about 20 wins wide. But the realistic guess is that they'll end up at the bottom of that estimation. Their offense was terrible before they traded Willy Taveras. They've got about half a dozen holes in a 9-man lineup. Lance Berkman, Carlos Lee, and Morgan Ensberg are each very good hitters. But if surrounded by 6 clones of Rafael Belliard, they're not too threatening.
Now take into account that their starting pitching is significantly worse than it was two years ago, or even last year. Getting 3 months of Roger Clemens at 6 innings a pop won't solve that problem.

PITTSBURGH PIRATES
2006 W-L Record: 67-95 (5th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 70-92
2007 Projection: 69-93
Strengths: Ummm . . . let's see . . . their logo is cool?
Weakness: Gross Incompetence . . . and their lineup sucks, too
Biggest Change from '06: Adam LaRoche, plus more seasoning for their young starters
One Reason:
One reason the Pirates will win in '07 is that we'll enter a parallel universe where a loss is really a win.
One reason the Pirates will lose in '07 is that they're the Pirates, man.
Notes:
I know I've said it before, but the Pirates are the sort of team who will just coast to 70 wins every year so long as they can find some sort of semi-exciting event in the offseason to sell season tickets. They're boring and that's a lot worse than just being bad.

Back tomorrow with the NL West.

2007 National League Predictions

NL EAST:

New York Mets (93-69) 91-95 win range

*Philadelphia Phillies (87-75) 85-89 win range

Florida Marlins (82-80) 80-84 win range

Atlanta Braves (80-82) 78-82 win range

Washington Nationals (68-94) 66-70 win range

NL CENTRAL:
St. Louis Cardinals (86-76) 84-88 win range

Milwaukee Brewers (83-79) 81-85 win range

Chicago Cubs (78-84) 76-80 win range

Cincinnati Reds (78-84) 76-80 win range

Houston Astros (75-87) 73-77 win range

Pittsburgh Pirates (69-93) 67-71 win range

NL WEST:

Los Angeles Dodgers (94-68) 92-96 win range
Arizona Diamondbacks (85-77) 83-87 win range

San Diego Padres (84-78) 82-86 win range

Colorado Rockies (78-84) 76-80 win range

San Francisco Giants (73-89) 71-75 win range

NL MVP: Albert Pujols, Cardinals

NL CY YOUNG: Jake Peavy, Padres

NL ROOKIE OF THE YEAR: Chris Young, Diamondbacks

NLCS: Dodgers over Cardinals

WS: Yankees over Dodgers

NL EAST

NEW YORK METS
2006 W-L Record: 97-65 (1st)

2006 pW-pL Record: 91-71

2007 Projection: 93-69

Strengths: Offense at skilled defensive positions; money; closer; trading chips

Weaknesses: Starting pitching x 10; Corner Outfielders

Biggest Change from 2006: Pedro no mas

One Reason:
One Reason the Mets will win in '07 is that they have the best team in the NL East (good reason). All of the concern about the Mets' starters is warranted, but they do have a lot of them lying around, and they don't need to be dominant for the Mets to win the east.

One Reason the Mets will lose in '07 is, of course, their starting rotation. The Mets can win without a dominant rotation, but it will be damn difficult. I seriously doubt the Mets will run away with the NL East like they did in '06. A lot of their success depends on acquiring another starting pitcher. Even considering the competition, you can't just pencil the Mets in as NL East Champions with that rotation.

Notes:

It's because of their starting pitching woes that I can't see the Mets advancing far in October. I give Omar Minaya the benefit of the doubt that he can make a move or two to shore up this woeful rotation. But I don't think there will be any "miracles" this year.
I should say, though, that I think Minaya did a good job filling the holes in his offense. Second base is still a concern, but it's a slow market for second baseman, and Jose Valentin did a good job last year. He also snagged Moises Alou to shore up the corner outfield spots offensively. I probably shouldn't have listed the corner outfield spots as a weakness, except that I feel pretty certain that we'll be seeing too much of Shawn Green and not enough of Lastings Milledge.

PHILADELPHIA PHILLIES

2006 W-L Record: 85-77 (2nd)

2006 pW-pL Record: 86-76

2007 Projection: 87-75

Strengths: Offense, duh; 1-2-3 starters

Weaknesses: third base; catcher; back of rotation; bullpen

Biggest Change from 2006: Freddy Garcia and Cole Hamels should help the Phillies over the hump and back into October.

One Reason:

One Reason the Phillies will win in '07 is their powerful offense and improved rotation depth.

One Reason the Phillies will lose in '07 is the quality of their starting rotation (cross your finger for Moyer/Eaton) and their spotty lineup (Wes F'n Helms?!)

Notes:
I actually didn't have the Phillies picked as my NL Wild Card team; I had the Diamondbacks. But then I listed out my win probabilities and realized that I actually thought the Phillies would win more games than the D-Backs. And winning more games than someone is a sure-fire way to beat them in a pennant race.
Truth be told, my guess for the Phillies is pretty optimistic, and my range for the D-Backs is too narrow. Arizona has far more upside than Philadelphia, but it's so uncertain that I went with the safe choice. Granted, this also enables me to have two picks for the Wild Card: my real pick and my real real pick. Some may say it's cheatin', I say it's thinkin'.

FLORIDA MARLINS

2006 W-L Record: 78-84 (4th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 80-82
2007 Projection: 82-80
Strengths: Youth; Bargain Value; Pitching Depth; Miguel Cabrera
Weaknesses: Youth; Bargain Value; Fluky Nature of '06
Biggest Change from 2006: Everybody's a year older (which isn't usually good news in Florida, but it is here)
One Reason:
One Reason the Marlins will win in '07 is their break-out potential. The Marlins have a solid core of young talent that will play .500 baseball most likely. But they have several young players with the chance to break out (Jeremy Hermida, most of their pitchers) and push them into Wild Card contention.

One Reason the Marlins will lose in '07 is that their 2006 success is hard to repeat. All of their rookies were so good, and so many of them reached their potential in 2006, that's there's not a lot of room for upward expansion. In fact, it's more realistic to expect several guys to suffer setbacks. We've already seen it start among the young pitchers (Jason Johnson, Anibal Sanchez), and it's likely to cascade. The only sure thing is Miguel Cabrera's MVP Candidacy.
The Marlins will most likely do in 2007 what they did in 2006: make an encouraging but unsuccessful run at the Wild Card.
Notes:

As I said before, the main reason I'm less than optimistic about the Marlins is that it's hard to repeat great luck with rookies like they had last year. A good comparison would be the 2005 Braves. The '05 Braves had that amazing rookie class that helped propel them into the postseason. But in 2006, most of those guys experienced (perfectly normal) growing pains and sophomore slumps.
It's great when you have everything go right for you. The only downside is knowing that you probably won't be as lucky again in the future. Long-term, the Marlins are on the path to contention, but it's a stretch to expect them to make the leap this season.

ATLANTA BRAVES

2006 W-L Record: 79-83 (3rd)
2006 pW-pL Record: 85-77
2007 Projection: 80-82
Strengths: Strong core contributors; improved bullpen; Brian McCann
Weaknesses: Core contributors are old and getting brittle; weak rotation; lineup depth
Biggest Change from 2006: Losing the right side of your infield in exchange for a relief pitcher. Mmwhat?
One Reason:

One Reason the Braves will win in '07 is that they're the Braves, and they've done stranger things before. I may be pessimistic about their young talent, but that doesn't mean it's not still there.

One Reason the Braves won't win in '07 is that Chipper Jones is still playing third base. This means more bad defense and another 40-50 games from their best hitter lost to the DL.
Notes:

I remember when I used to complain every Spring Training about how depressing it was to know the Braves were going to win just to lose in October. I miss those days.
The Braves' Pythagorean record was very encouraging last year, suggesting that they were much closer to contention than they looked. But it's hard for me to believe that an 85-win team can get better when they lose a pretty good right side of the infield for no apparent reason. The two best players on this team are Chipper and Smoltz, and they're getting much older.
I guess I can use all my experience as a devotee of a doomed October team and become a Yankee fan.
Yeah, right.

WASHINGTON NATIONALS

2006 W-L Record: 71-91 (5th)
2006 pW-pL Record: 70-92
2007 Projection: 68-94
Strengths: Ryan Zimmerman
Weaknesses: About everything else
Biggest Change from 2006: The starting rotation is now completely gutted; Tim Redding is their #2 starter!
One Reason:

One Reason the Nats will win in '07 is that theirs is the only fanbase with the power of federal subpoena.
One Reason the Nats will lose in '07 is that they're a bad, hopeless baseball team . . . What? That's only one.
Notes:
Baseball America's 2007 Prospect Handbook rates the Nats' prospects as the worst in baseball. Their "Impact" grade is a D, and their "Depth" grade is an F. It's really scary that such a barren major league team has such little support in the minors.
On the bright side though, things really are improving. Granted, it would be hard for them not to improve, but the Nats have done several things to provide themselves with depth in the lower minor leagues, from drafting better to making better trades. Even GM Jim Bowden, whom I admittedly give a hard time, has done a better job of handling the team. He's apparently seen the folly of the attempted quick fix (a la Cristian Guzman or Vinny Castilla) and seems to committed to overhauling the franchise from the bottom up. The Nats have a new ballpark opening up soon, which gives them a bit of a target date for rebooting the club. It also gives them the promise of extra cash in the future and gives their fans something to hope for while the current incarnation stumbles back to last place.

Things are getting better in Washington. But it sure as hell won't look any better in 2007.

Back later with the other divisions.

Aahhhh

Everyone needs a vacation. Granted, mine didn't involve going anywhere exotic and tropical. In fact, I was in the midst of a devilish winter storm. Baseball slows down in early February, especially in a year where most of the free agents were gone before Christmas. As it is, pitchers and catchers are in camp, and spring training proper will being quite soon. So as the camps are open, so must my blog re-open (they don't pay me for my metaphors . . . whoever they are).

• After what seemed like a ghastly eternity, Barry Bonds finalized his contract with the Giants, paying him $15.8 million for one year. Giants' officials spent weeks upon weeks trying to hammer out an agreement with Bonds' agent. Speculation was that the club's concerns revolved mainly around Bonds' legal issues. Not only did was the club trying to structure performance bonuses in case of a Bonds injury, they were trying to include some sort of clause that would allow them protection in case Bonds was indicted (and thus unavailable to play). Their first agreement was rejected by the league office, but the sides were finally able to come to terms on a finalized deal. Details were sketchy, but this reliable source says that the club reserves the right to terminate Bonds' contract if he is indicted (with some restrictions), and that Bonds will not file a union grievance if this does occur.
  Another very fascinating part of the contract states that Bonds' personal trainers are no longer club employees, and thus will no longer enj0y unfettered access to the clubhouse, etc. This shows that the Giants are trying to put some distance between themselves and Barry's medicine men, something that they probably should have done ten years ago. But where your conscience fails you, fear of a prosecution often compensates.
• A lot of ink has been spilt discussing contract extensions, as far as who's going to get them and who isn't. The most notable example would be the eternally outspoken Curt Schilling, who was not able to reach a deal with the Red Sox, and thus will become a free agent after this season. Schilling has a knack for polarizing public opinion in many ways, and I think the Sox were probably just tired of it. That said, the decision makes perfect business and baseball sense. At Schilling's age, there's no reason to commit big money to 2008 without knowing what 2007 holds. The Sox will miss Schilling, but not very much; he's been replaced as #1 pitcher by Matsuzaka and is too much of a financial risk at his age (and with his poor conditioning).
• Carlos Zambrano, who is also a free agent after this year, made a statement to the effect of "pay me now or lose me" to the Cubs, but then backed off. Making public ultimatums in Spring Training is rarely a good PR move. Even considering that the Cubs have already bought a small Mediterranean island this off-season, they'll probably end up ponying up for their star pitcher; it's just a matter of how much.
• There's been a lot of speculation about Alex Rodriguez's contract. A-Rod's deal has an opt-out clause after this season, similar to the ones included in the J.D. Drew and Aramis Ramirez deals. As if the media doesn't have enough reason to hound A-Rod into a self-imposed exile, now they're obsessing over whether he will decide to opt out of his current deal, as both Drew and Ramirez did.
  I can't imagine how miserable it must be to be Alex Rodriguez in New York, but I'm not so sure that A-Rod would choose to opt out. Granted, I'm biased; I don't think he's the son of Satan bent on stealing money from orphans. Even so, both Drew and Ramirez opted out of their deals because, in the current climate, they could do better for themselves. But even considering the financial inflation involved, I'm not sure that A-Rod could find a better deal than his current one. If so, it's doubtful that it would be that much more -- certainly not enough to merit being burned in effigy in the Bronx. We'll see how this plays out, but I don't really see A-Rod "cutting and running" at this point.
• Keith Foulke, unable to make a comeback from the injuries that limited him over the past two years, retired last week. Foulke had signed a deal with Cleveland and was pencilled in as their closer, but this puts the Indians back at square one (i.e. Joe Borowski). Foulke was just 34. He may have been an old 34, but it looked like he still had some good ball to pitch. That he would make this decision after signing a deal must mean that he was in pretty bad shape.
• In what can only be described as some sort of moronic deja vu, there has been a bit of a disagreement expressed over the ownership of the baseball used to record the last out of the 2006 World Series. It hasn't reached the courts yet, and may be nothing more than a slight squabble, but Adam Wainwright has the ball and apparently Yadier Molina wants it.
  Oy.
• In other extension news, the Twins signed up Joe Mauer to a four-year deal that skips over his arbitration years. Good move for them. Bill Hall (of all people) signed an extension with the Brewers, an odd move to lock up a Player Out of Position. Austin Kearns signed a three-year deal to stay in Washington. Also, the Reds signed their two top starters to extensions; Aaron Harang gets a perfectly sensible deal (4 years, $36.5 mil), while Bronson Arroyo signed a two-year extension that will go into effect when his current contract expires after the 2008 season (2 years, $25 mil.). The Harang deal is great. And while I'm not on the "Arroyo-as-ace" bandwagon yet, two more years isn't so unreasonable, even if he is nothing more than above-average. And in 2009, $12.5 million a year won't be too bad for a starter. I guess you can forgive the Reds for getting antsy about their pitching. Two down, ten to go.
  (There was an article in Cincinnati's Citybeat newsweekly about the Reds, which claimed that their biggest weakness was their bullpen. That's kind of true, but they're not exactly sitting pretty in terms of offense or starting pitching, and the former is mostly the fault of the current administration. The author was much kinder toward GM Wayne Krivsky than I've been, even suggesting that the complete turnover of his staff in two years is a good thing).
• In more depressing Reds news, Ken Griffey, Jr. confirmed that he did suffer a wrist injury in December, as had been speculated. Griffey claims that he suffered the injury while playing with his children, which may very well be true, considering that the man is made of Waterford crystal. It really looks like we're seeing the end of the old Ken Griffey, Jr., with last year's woeful performance not likely to improve this season.
  Over at espn.com's Page 2, Jeff Pearlman begs to differ. He makes the argument that Griffey really was better then Bonds, and he's the one who deserves all the media coverage this Spring. Pearlman's argument is, essentially, that Griffey used to be a pain in the ass, but then grew up. Therefore, he's a better ballplayer than Barry, because he was a stand-up guy who didn't use steroids.
  That's very debatable on a statistical level and is pretty doubtful even on an anecdotal level.
  Pearlman has not only made the sweeping assumption that Junior is clean, he's determined that that makes him a better person and that it (apparently) jumps the huge gap between him and Barry as players. While we can all be sure that Griffey wasn't as drugged-up as Barry, that doesn't mean that he was clean. He looked clean, yes. But what the hell does that mean?
  And even if Griffey was clean and Barry wasn't, there's not enough statistical weight in the world to bridge the gap between their performance on the field. And while I know it's tempting to create some heroes in a pretty barren moral climate, we just shouldn't be doing that. Because we either fail completely, or we deify someone by ignoring their imperfections. And neither I nor Jeff Pearlman nor any other mortal knows enough about Barry Bonds and Ken Griffey to pass this judgment upon them.
  I hate to pick apart such an honest article by Pearlman, but I think this is the sort of thing we do too often with athletes. Searching for heroes, we take an athlete (or a politician, or a parent) and turn them into a mythical creature. And when they don't measure up, we blame them completely. Sometimes we'll even go to more trouble to tear down our former heroes than we did building them up in the first place. Doesn't s0und familiar? Look this man in the face and tell me that's not exactly what we did to him.

I'll be back soon with my predictions for 2007, one division at a time. One thing I'm sure of? It's nice to have this.