N.L. Central Offseason – Team by Team

Chicago Cubs

Dec. 31:  Cubs sign Marlon Byrd to a three-year contract worth $15 MM.

The thinking here is that Byrd can be their starting center fielder.

Let’s take a look at Marlon Byrd’s recent history first:

YEAR	PA	HR	AVG	OBP	SLG
2007	454	10	307	355	459
2008	462	10	298	380	462
2009	599	20	283	329	479

Not bad for a center fielder.  But Byrd was playing for Texas those seasons – in hitter-friendly Ameriquest Field (or whatever the hell it’s called now).
Here’s what My Darlin’ Marlon did on the road those years:

YEAR	PA	HR	AVG	OBP	SLG
2007	230	6	259	304	410
2008	224	3	297	362	411
2009	292	6	285	322	419

I believe the word I’m looking for is … erp!  (Byrd is a career 272/322/393 hitter on the road.  Double erp!)

NL Central Preview: Can the Cubs Three-Peat?

My Prediction:
1 – Chicago Cubs
2 – St. Louis Cardinals
3 – Milwaukee Brewers
4 – Cincinnati Reds
5 – Houston Astros
6 – Pittsburgh Pirates

Chicago Cubs
The Cubs are strong favorites in the NL Central once again. They’ve kept together most of the key players from 2008, while other teams in the division are either taking a step back or just struggling to stay in place.
The team is returning its top four starters in Ryan Dempster, Carlos Zambrano, Ted Lilly and Rich Harden. It’s a strong group, although there are concerns about Harden’s ability to make 20 starts, let alone 30. The team also took a big step back at closer, losing Kerry Wood to free agency and replacing him with trade acquisition Kevin Gregg. The Cubs have clearly overrated Gregg, due to his status as a Proven Closer. They’ve still got a great safety net in Carlos Marmol, but the Cubs will see a big difference between Gregg and the departed Wood.
Chicago has a unique depth to their offense.

2008 NL Central in Review

Chicago Cubs

W-L: 97-64 (1st in NL Central)

pW-pL: 98-63
Payroll: $118,345,833 (3rd in NL)

R/G: 5.31 (1st in NL)

ERA: 3.87 (T-2nd in NL)

DER: .703 (1st in NL)

Team MVPs: Ryan Dempster, Aramis Ramirez, Geovany Soto

A Drag on the Payroll: Kosuke Fukudome (257/359/379, $6 MM), Jason Marquis (4.53 ERA in 167 IP, $6.4 MM), Bobby Howry (5.35 ERA in 70.2 IP, $4 MM)

What Went Right:

State of the Baseball Union

Apologies for the one-month absence. Health issues persist, I'm sorry to say. But what a fascinating month in the world of MLB.

• Ned Yost was fired, in a pretty unprecedented move, with just 12 games to play in the season. The Brewers were struggling, but in real terms, what's the difference between Yost and Sveum over a 12-game period? It could be positive, but that's assuming that Sveum makes none of the same mistakes as Yost (which everyone seems to be assuming for some reason). This smacks as a panic move, and my problem is that panic is really contagious. So when ownership starts yelling, screaming, and gnashing their teeth, they can't expect the players to maintain their calm. While most people agree that Yost deserved to get fired, it's hard for me to accept that this was the best way to resolve the issue.
  As a side note, GM Doug Melvin has given Yost a great deal of praise, and it seems that the decision was made above his head, at ownership level. If Melvin was totally unwilling to fire Yost and the move needed to be made, I can understand management stepping in. Just not in mid-September.
  

News bits and Required Reading

I'm watching the Cubs and Reds right now on WGN, and commentator Len Kasper mentioned a breaking baseball story that caught my attention immediately. So I went online to check it out, and there it was: Tejada admits to being two years older than he had said. Miguel Tejada, whose birthday has always been listed as May 25, 1976, admitted that he was actually born May 25, 1974. Tejada's admission came just as ESPN was about to air a special with evidence exposing Tejada's real birthday.
First of all, what does this mean? It's bad news, any way you slice it. Astros GM Ed Wade said, ""Fact of the matter is that he plays like he's 25, so I don't think it really matters a whole lot." Well, Ed Wade might actually be dumb enough to believe that, but in reality, there's a huge difference in baseball between age 32 and age 34. The Astros owe Tejada $13 million dollars over the next two seasons, plus $4 million in deferred payments on his signing bonus. Tejada doesn't turn 34 until May, but that still means that the Astros are committing big money to a mid-30s player who can no longer play a key defensive position. And for a team whose best case scenario is 4th place, that's absolutely unacceptable. I wasn't such a fan of the Tejada trade when it happened, and now I think it's a terrible idea.
But could the Astros have known about the lie? Yes. In fact, they could have found out so easily, that it's a joke that no one figured this out sooner. Tejada's real birth date was on his green card and his driver's license! I guess the real culprits here are the Orioles, who signed Tejada to the contract in the first place. Before investing so much money in a player, I would run some background to make sure he was really as young as he claimed. And it seems like the most cursory of background checks would have revealed Tejada's real age.
I'm sure there will be more people, like Ed Wade, who just say, "Hey, he's a good player, and that's all that matters." That's a load of crap. With a baseball player -- any baseball player -- you can't predict the future. The only thing you can do is come up with a rough forecast based on a player's basica ttributes, with age being #1 among them. Many people think of baseball players as absolutely unique; like snowflakes. But in reality, it's very easy to make broad estimates of a player's future performance based on a few select criteria. And age is at the top of the list. A player's skills get worse as he gets older, and the closer you get to 40, the faster the decline occurs. You may not want to take such a dim view of Tejada's future, but I'm afraid that everything we know about baseball leads us to a fairly simple conclusion: players get worse as they get older, and every year -- especially every two years -- makes a difference.

• The blog Florida Marlins Finances takes a close look at the financial records of the team and comes to a pretty strong conclusion: the team isn't nearly as bad off as they would like you to believe.
• Former major leaguer Doug Glanville wrote this piece for the New York Times. You don't find many ballplayers who are this articulate.
• These pictures of Hideki Okajima's delivery are fascinating -- unless human contortionists make you sick.
• I love this t-shirt for many, many reasons.

Back soon, with words for the eternally grumpy Murray Chass.

NL Central Preview

CHICAGO CUBS
2007 W-L Record: 85-77
2007 pW-pL Record: 87-75
Strengths: Strong Offense, Solid Pitching
Weaknesses: OBP, Depth
Biggest Change from '07: Fukudome and his .400+ OBP

One Reason:
One reason the Cubs will win in '08 is that the best is set low in the NL Central. The Cubs won the division last year, have managed to improve over the offseason (without spending $1 billion), and aren't facing any rivals presenting serious challenges. They're not absolutely safe from Milwaukee or even possibly Cincinnati, but they're easy favorites.
One reason the Cubs will lose in '08 is that a lot of their production is precarious. The best-case scenario for their lineup is good, but if Fukudome struggles in his first U.S. season, or if Aramis Ramirez and/or Alfonso Soriano take a step back to mediocrity, the Cubs will be hard-pressed to replace them. There aren't a lot of backup plans for the lineup, and the same could be said for the rotation, where an inordinate amount of pressure rests on Carlos Zambrano and Ted Lilly. The Cubs do have some backups here in Jon Lieber and Sean Marshall, but neither of them can replace an injured or ineffective Zambrano.

Notes:

State of the Baseball Union: NL Central

Milwaukee Brewers (62-57)
My Prediction: 83-79, 2nd place

At Current Pace: 84-78

The Brewers have experienced their fair share of ups and downs so far this season. They got off to a great start and then slowed down, allowing the Cubs to catch up with them. They've really stumbled as of late, but fortunately for them so have the Cubs (who've lost 7 of 10). The Brewers now possess a 1.5 game lead in the NL Central, and it's become a real neck-and-neck race with Chicago.

So what chance do the Brewers have of making their first postseason in 25 years? I'll give them the edge over the Cubs, but it's such a small edge that it may prove irrelevant over the 7 weeks left in the season.

Offensively, the Brewers have scored 568 runs, tops in the Central and 5th in the NL. I think they can keep up this pace; they've got good depth offensively and have several players due to bounce back from a slow first half. They'll be getting full-time play from Rookie of the Year-to-be Ryan Braun (348/392/666), as well as Corey Hart (276/340/505) and J.J. Hardy (274/326/468). They should also get better production from Rickie Weeks, who struggled mightily in the first half (209/336/358). And then, of course, there's Prince Fielder (289/383/614), who isn't going anywhere.

I'd be more concerned with the pitching staff. The team's 4.42 ERA is 9th in the league, and is notably worse than the Cubs (4.01). The Cubs are also working with a stronger defense (.710 DER to the Brewers' .687, which ranks 13th in the NL).

Milwaukee's bullpen is actually doing fine. Francisco Cordero is still doing fine as closer, and the Brewers have gotten good work out of Derrick Turnbow, Brian Shouse, Matt Wise, and trade acquisition Scott Linebrink. Each of those five has an ERA above the league average.

No, the Brewer's big problem is their rotation. They've gotten great work from ace Ben Sheets, but injuries have again limited his performance to just 119.1 IP. He's on the DL now, but should be coming off soon. The sooner the better, because the Brewers' best starter after him has been young Yovani Gallardo (4.20 ERA in 8 starts). Gallardo, the team's top prospect, has been a godsend even though he's not been as dominant as hoped. Because after Sheets and Gallardo, here are the pitchers who have started the most games for Milwaukee:

Jeff Suppan: 25 starts, 4.90 ERA, 54:80 BB:K ratio in 150.2 IP

Dave Bush: 22 starts, 5.07 ERA, 136.2 IP, 33:102 BB:K ratio but 19 HR allowed

Claudio Vargas: 21 starts, 4.87 ERA, 118.1 IP

Chris Capuano: 21 starts, 4.96 ERA, 114.1 IP, 46:99 BB:K ratio



Without Sheets, the Brewers are in serious trouble, even if their offense is good. The best-case scenario is that Sheets comes back and pitches well, Gallardo improves, and Capuano starts pitching m0re like his previous self (4.33 career ERA). If they can do that, then they can survive the low-end garbage pitching of Suppan and Vargas at the back of the rotation.

It's a tough call to make, but I'm going to go out on a limb and pick the Brewers to hold on and win the Central. They've got their share of problems, yes, but then so do the Cubs . . .



Chicago Cubs (60-58)
My Prediction: 78-84

At Current Pace: 82-80

The Cubs, after a first half that saw everything go wrong, are starting to turn things around and play to their potential. It's really surprising how many things are going right for the Cubs. Although, as you can see from my prediction, I was pessimistic about their chances to begin with.

But really, who could have predicted such strong work from all these people:



Mark DeRosa: 288/363/418

Mike Fontenot: (297/347/443)

Ted Lilly: 3.51 ERA, 41:124 BB:K ratio, 151.1 IP

Rich Hill: 3.85 ER, 140.1 IP, 48 BB:K ratio

Carlos Marmol: 1.83 ERA, 22:61 BB:K ratio in 44.1 IP

Jason Marquis: 4.18 ERA, 140 IP (although Marquis' numbers are really a great start followed by a few months of pitching like ... well, himself.)

The Cubs have also gotten strong production from several different relievers (Angel Guzman, Michael Wuertz, etc.), which is one of the biggest improvements in this year's squad, to my mind. Give Lou Pineilla credit for getting creative with job descriptions in the bullpen. He's taken the talent available to him and done a fine job deploying it, with the success of Marmol the best example.

If only the offense were nearly as successful. You'll notice that the only real surprises on the offensive side of the ledger were Mark DeRosa -- who's played more outfield than infield -- and Mike Fontenot, who isn't really that good. Sure, the Cubs have gotten the usual great work from Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez, but here's a short list of their offensive disappointments:

Alfonso Soriano: 297/336/511 (no, that's not bad, but it's very disappointing considering his salary and the expectation that he would hit like an MVP at Wrigley)
Ryan Theriot (286/348/367): Theriot's a great guy to have on your roster and is a good emergency fill-in at second, but there's no reason for him to come to bat more than 400 times (416 PAs and counting)
Cliff Floyd (290/366/382): Say goodbye to power. The Cubs entered the season with too many corner outfielders on the roster; why then did they end up moving their second baseman (DeRosa) to right field? It's because Floyd and Jacque Jones (see below) couldn't keep their jobs.
Jacque Jones (265/326/375): This guy shouldn't even be on the club anymore. He should have been traded in the offseason while he still had some value. As it is, he's just dead weight on the roster.
Matt Murton (263/335/391): The good news (relatively speaking) is that Murton is much better than this. And he's also much cheaper than Jones and Floyd.

Cesar Izturis (246/298/304): Thank God the club finally left the Dusty Baker era once and for all. Izturis is horrible, and he's now right where he belongs: Pittsburgh.

The Cubs' inactivity at the trade deadline may seriously come back to haunt them. They've got plenty of players on the roster, yes, and many of them are expensive. But that's doesn't mean that they actually have someone to play catcher or shortstop, and they're still short two outfielders.
As much as things have gone right for the Cubs' pitching staff so far, their lineup has been pretty disappointing. The best plan now would probably be to release Jacque, move Soriano to left, and install Felix Pie in center. Pie hasn't hit well so far this year, but he's not much worse than Floyd and Jones and is at least much cheaper and a good defender. It would also be a good move for the future to get him more at bats at the big-league level.

As for catcher, the best thing would have been to keep Michael Barrett, but I can understand that there were some personality issues there (how extreme they were depends on whom you ask). Without Barrett, they should have just promoted Geovany Soto. He's not great, but he's not bad either (Koyie Hill is bad) and he's cheap. Instead the Cubs made a trade -- premeditated, I assume -- to get one of the worst players in baseball, who also comes with a pretty big salary. Jason Kendall has hit well for the Cubs so far, but don't count on that lasting very long.

If the Cubs do lose the NL Central to the Brewers, it will mainly be their own fault. They've done a very poor job of maximizing production from their lineup, although to be fair, a lot of that is due to the large amount of inefficient dollars being spent on otherwise useless players.

If the Cubs do win the NL Central, it won't be because of Alfonso Soriano, Mark DeRosa, Jason Marquis or even Ted Lilly. It will be thanks to Lou Pineilla (for removing the shackles of ignorance from the pitching staff's deployment) and the guys who were here to begin with: Lee, Ramirez, Hill, Marmol, and others. If you could find a measure for dollars spent compared to positive effect on the team, this year's Cubs would have to rank as one of the worst ever. The team has improved, yes, but not nearly in proportion to the money spent, and most of the improvement came not from the new players acquired but from a better understanding of the talent they already had.

So even if the Cubs do win the division, it may not exactly be something to be proud of. Because they'll be winning it in spite of the hundreds of millions of dollars they spent this offseason.

St. Louis Cardinals (56-60)
My Prediction: 86-76

On Current Pace: 78-84

The Cardinals are fooling themselves if they think they're going to get back into contention this year. They're slowly working their way back to .500 -- and bully for them -- but I can't see them making it past the Cubs and Brewers. The Cardinals just aren't that good.
Their offense is especially weak. The glory years of Pujols/Rolen/Edmonds are over, and the Cards need to get to work about replacing the latter 2/3 of that troika. Rolen and Edmonds are still falling far sheet of even their career averages. And considering their respective salaries, this is very bad for the organization.
After Pujols and Chris Duncan (276/371/522), the Cards haven't gotten consistently good production from anyone. They've gotten some promising work from some part-timers, and this might lead some to believe that the Cards just need to put it all together to succeed. But I'm very dubious.
Assuming that Pujols (1B), Rolen (3B), Duncan (LF) and Edmonds (CF) are in the lineup, who's filling in elsewhere? In the outfield, the Cardinals have gotten decent work from Juan Encarnacion (290/330/440), but even that modest production is above what we'd expect from him. There's also been some promising work done by Brendan Ryan, Ryan Ludwick, Skip Schumaker and, most recently, Rick Ankiel. But what the Cardinals have here is a small group of very good bench players but no one to step up with significant offense, the kind of offense that's needed for a batting order with so many holes.
In the middle infield, the Cards have deployed David Eckstein and Adam Kennedy. Eckstein has been fair, as usual (295/342/358), but Kennedy has been the worst player on the team this year, hitting 219/282/290 in 306 plate appearances! If they'd replaced Kennedy with a halfway decent guy, they'd already be above .500.
And catching is Yadier Molina, whose defense is so good that it almost makes up for his dreadful offense (268/337/318).
The Cardinals' batting order isn't getting any better. I know Cardinals fans are optimists, and there's a lot to get excited about with the promotion of Rick Ankiel to the majors. They rank 11th in the NL in runs scored, and are a lot closer to last than they are to first.

Throughout this whole entry, I haven't even mentioned the St. Louis pitching. That's because they rank 14th in the NL in ERA, behind only Houston and Cincinnati (who hit in more hitter-friendly parks). And they'd be even worse than that if it weren't for the fact that their mediocre bullpen somewhat makes up for their catastrophic starting rotation.
Sorry, but the Cards aren't going anywhere this year, and in any other division, they wouldn't be going anywhere next year either.

Houston Astros (54-65)
My Prediction: 75-87
On Current Pace: 74-88
Carlos Lee is a good hitter, and he's done a wonderful job so far this year (302/356/536). But if there's ever been a free agent signing more irrelevant to a team's postseason chances, I can't think of one. The Astros are a team barren, barren of talent. They're very top-heavy, with legitimate stars like Lance Berkman, Roy Oswalt, Hunter Pence, and Lee, but no mid-level players to fill in the gaps. Instead, it's a long drop from the stars to the rest of the roster, which is 5th-place material, easily. By the time the Astros are able to rebuild their roster into something of a contender, Lee will be much older and no longer justifying his salary. That's the real waste of his contract; the fact that it's money that won't mean a damn thing to the team's long-term interests and would have been better off invested in draft picks and scouting.
As it is, the Astros are lucky to have Berkman, Pence, and Lee backed up with unlikely slugger Luke Scott (255/355/507) and Mike Lamb (296/375/478). That means they only have four gaping holes in the lineup (well, five, now that Pence is on the DL).
In the middle infield, the Astros have defensive expert Adam Everett at shortstop, but he's also the team's worst hitter (228/275/316), and that's saying something. At second base, the Astros will be lucky to rid themselves of Craig Biggio (248/285/396); the future Hall-of-Famer is no longer justifying a spot in the lineup, which was evident last year, but oh well. His replacement-in-waiting, Chris Burke, hasn't fared any better (224/304/360).
The Astros still have Brad Ausmus behind the plate, and we can only hope that they've finally run out of sentimental reasons to keep this millstone (233/313/319) around their necks.
Next to Lee and Pence, the Astros need someone else in the outfield. They haven't much luck so far, as they've given over 250 at bats to the dreadful duo of Orlando Palmeiro and Jason Lane.

The sad part isn't how bad the Houston lineup is, it's how predictably bad it was going into the season. Not to mention the fact that it should be worse; Lamb and Scott aren't usually this good.

On the pitching side of the equation, things are equally depressing. Only the Reds and Marlins have allowed more runs and, just like with the offense, this eventuality was not only thoroughly predictable, it's going to be their reality for the near future. Top pitching prospects Jason Hirsh and Taylor Buchholz were traded to the Rockies for Jason Jennings, who's been so awful (6.15 ERA in 16 starts) that the Astros couldn't even trade him away.
Roy Oswalt has been one of the NL's best pitchers (3.32 ERA in 172.2 IP), as advertised. But here's the rest of their rotation:

Jason Jennings: 6.15 ERA, see above
Woody Williams: 5.09 ERA, 41:78 BB:K ratio
Wandy Rodriguez: 4.34 ERA in 139 IP; 41:120 BB:K ratio
Matt Albers: 6.20 ERA in 9 starts

Neither Jennings nor Albers are really this bad, but that's small consolation. Williams is indeed this bad, and league-average pitching is the best you're going to get out of Wandy.
In the bullpen, the story is the continuing yo-yo act by Brad Lidge. Lidge sports a 3.26 ERA, with a 20:66 BB:K ratio in 49.2 IP. Considering their future prospects, it's insane that the Astros haven't traded Lidge by now, especially given the fact that every contending team is always looking for bullpen help. The 'Stros did trade Dan Wheeler, but they didn't get prospects in return; they got a mediocre 29-year-old corner infielder (Ty Wigginton).

The Astros aren't going to be doing much winning this year or next. They do have some hope in prospects such as Pence, but they've let so many positions on the field go to pot that they're now left facing a complete overhaul if they want to compete. It's doubtful that the team will trade big-money guys like Lee or Oswalt (at least not yet), so we're probably left with a couple more years of the team acting like contenders even though we all know they aren't. That's a depressing prospect, especially for a franchise that's been one of the league's best for over ten years now.

Cincinnati Reds: (51-67)
My Prediction: 78-84
On Current Pace: 70-92
The Reds are doing worse than even I predicted. Wow.
Some local sources are still in denial; the Cincinnati weekly Citybeat actually ran a cover story claiming (once again) that all the Reds needed were some relievers. I should point out that Citybeat ran a baseball story with the same gist four years ago, and I wrote back saying that they were deluding themselves (my response was published). It would seem that time had proven me right, but learning from past mistakes isn't high on the list of requirements for sportswriters.
The Reds rank 7th in the NL in runs scored right now, with 553. Considering their ballpark, that's a travesty, and it demolishes the Citybeat argument. The Reds' best hitters have been Ken Griffey, Jr., Adam Dunn, and Scott Hatteberg, all of whom will be gone sooner rather than later. Fotunately, the Reds do have some A-level hitting prospects, such as Jay Bruce and Joey Votto, but unless they can hold onto Dunn or find some way to replace these guys, it will all just come out even.
The rest of the Reds' order is full of qualified successes. Brandon Phillips has done well (271/317/460), but he's not the All-Star many Cincinnati fans see him as. His unlikely career after failing in Cleveland's farm system is inspiring, just not quite historic. He's done a good job on defense, but he's not the sort of player you can build a franchise around, especially not with that OBP.
Josh Hamilton has been a great success (278/369/541), and there's really not much I can say about him except that he's still probably too good to be true. That's not to say that he won't stick around as a very useful player, but we can't assume that the first 241 plate appearances of his pro career are going to be a representative sample.
Ryan Freel is a heck of a utility player and has become an institution in the Queen City, but I hate to burst your bubble, he's not good enough to start everyday. He can be a great help filling the super-utility role, but he'll be 32 next year and hasn't learned to stop running into walls. As a result, he's played in just 75 games this year and hit an awful 245/308/347.
Edwin Encarnacion has had a terrible year (261/336/371). I've predicted big things for Edwin (well, big as in he'll be a quality everyday player), and it may just be a rationalization, but I wonder if the Reds' total ambivalence toward Edwin and the silly minor league stints aren't hurting him. This is a lot like what happened to Austin Kearns, where the Reds were far too focused on a player's faults and just wouldn't let them do what they do best. And for Edwin, that's (usually) hitting. He's also the only guy on the current lineup who can reliably be expected to be around the next time Cincinnati contends.
The Reds need offense; they especially need offense that they can rely on for the foreseeable future. Combining Bruce and Votto with (hopefully) Encarnacion and Dunn would be a good start, but considering the upper management, I really don't think the Reds are able to accurately determine their problems and issues.

The Reds have one of the worst pitching staffs in all of baseball; their team ERA of 4.83 is the worst in the NL, and their DER of .677 ranks them 15th in the league in defense (just ahead of Florida).
That ain't good.
The Reds do have a good 1-2-3 starting rotation projected for the near future in Bailey-Harang-Arroyo. The problem this year is that Bailey wasnt quite ready for the majors after all, and Bronson Arroyo fell off a cliff. Arroyo isn't as good as he was last year, when he was one of the best in the league, but I think he's a solid #3, and let's hope (for the Reds' sake) that he is. After that, the Reds need help. Matt Belisle's move to the rotation has worked out about as well as you'd expect (5.40 ERA in 23 starts), and while Bobby Livingston has done well so far, he's not apt to keep it up. But still, in the scheme of things, having three good starting pitchers for the foreseeable future is a victory for the Reds. And let's not forget Aaron Harang, who is indeed better than people think.
The Reds' bullpen has been a big problem, yes, and luckily this year Wayne Krivsky didn't try to solve it by driving a dump truck out to the Relief Pitchers' Landfill and loading up. The Reds have shown patience with their in-house pitchers and, while things have gone horribly, they haven't yet panicked and made things worked like I expected them to. I wouldn't be averse to seeing them sign a mid-level innings eater to a free agent deal, but they need to avoid the Baltimore Solution of buying out every free agent reliever. And considering this administration's track record with relief pitchers and impatience, that may be exactly what they do. And can you blame them? It would be Citybeat off their backs.

The Reds have some good pieces to put together a contender and may actually be in better shape, long-term, than Houston or even St. Louis. But that requires that the front office uses what talent they have well and does a good job of targeting areas for improvement.

Which likely means that Krivsky & Co. will screw it all up again and get fired. Let's just hope (as Reds fans) that those rumors about Walt Jocketty are true . . .

Pittsburgh Pirates (49-68)
My Prediction: 69-93
On Current Pace: 68-94
I pledged in these entries to discuss major league baseball teams. I've already discussed the 5 major league teams in the NL Central, so I don't see any need to discuss the Pirates.

Have a nice day.

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.

Does anyone here speak English? Or ancient Greek?

Go ahead and put me on the DL with a severely bruised ego.
News today re: the tenders, non-tenders and love-me tenders.

• First of all, the Baltimore Orioles signed free agent Jay Payton to a 2-year contract for $9.5 million. The report was that the Orioles had finally found their right-handed hitting outfielder. Well, that's half-true; Payton is right-handed. But I'm not so sure about the whole "hitter" thing.
  The Orioles scored 768 runs last year, only 12 more than the last-place Mariners. You would think that, coming into this off-season, the team would try to target some positions that are ripe for improvement. Catcher, Second Base, Shortstop, Third Base, and DH are filled with free agents (or guys under long-term deals). Corey Patterson is set in center, as is Nick Markakis in right. That leaves first base and left field.
  The Orioles punted one opportunity when they signed Kevin Millar to play first base. But Millar should at least hit enough to survive, and he only got a 1-year deal. But Payton, who walks, talks, and quacks like a fourth outfielder, got a 2-year deal. 34-year-old Payton hit 296/325/418 last year, which isn't in any way adequate for a starting left fielder. Payton's contract isn't for much money, so they would be able to move him to a backup role if an upgrade came along. But are the Orioles even aware that they need an upgrade? And how long will they keep Payton starting in left until they realize it?
• But the big news of today was a trade: the Rockies traded Jason Jennings and reliever Miguel Asencio to Houston for center fielder Willy Taveras and pitching prospects Jason Hirsh and Taylor Buchholz.
  I remarked before that it's a good thing for the Astros that they didn't give up Hirsh, Buchholz, and Taveras to get a pitcher as average (and expensive) as Jon Garland. And yet they've given up just that to get Jennings, who is much cheaper, but whose track record isn't nearly as strong. In fact, Jennings has every appearance of being a LAIM. And although he made a strong showing in 2006, there was little to be happy about from 2002-2005, even when you take Coors Field into account. Add in the fact that Jennings is a free agent after this season (I'm pretty sure), and the Astros have taken a big hit in their long-term plans for a very questionable return on the short term.
  Is it possible that I'm not giving Jennings enough credit? He did pitch quite well in 2006, posting a 3.78 ERA in a tough run environment, setting a career high in innings pitched and strikeouts (212 and 142, respectively). Is it just Coors Field that makes Jennings look bad? Partly. His career ERA on the road is a respectable 4.37, compared to 5.19 at Coors. He has a higher walk rate on the road, but his strikeout rate is also higher. His road K rate is about 6.16 per 9 innings, which is about average.
  So who is Jason Jennings? He's a 28-year-old with good durability who has an average K rate, an above-average walk rate, and is pretty good at limiting home runs, especially given his environment.
  That's a quality guy to have around. He's probably never going to be an All-Star, but that depends on your point of view. The pre-2006 Jennings looked to be much more of a low-end LAIM. But in 2006, Jennings took a noticeable step forward. Is this a step forward for good, or just a career year? Are his numbers, even his road numbers, better than Coors makes them look? That's a tough question.
  However, the point here isn't to question how good Jason Jennings is, it's to ask whether or not the Astros should have made the trade. So is Jennings (and Asencio, the raw throw-in) worth giving up your two top pitching prospects and your starting center fielder?
  I don't think so. Hirsh was the pride of the Houston system. He's shown good control and poise in the minors, arriving in the majors last year for a 9-start engagement. Hirsh pitched quite well last year in Double-A (2.87 ERA, 165 K, 42 BB and 12 HR in 172.1 IP) and continued that in Triple-A this year. He had trouble in Houston, posting a 6.04 ERA thanks in part to 11 HR allowed in 44.2 IP. This could be a problem for Hirsh; he allowed few homers in the minors, but once in Houston his fly-ball tendencies (32% while an Astro) caught up with him. Unfortunately for Hirsh, he's going to Colorado.
  If the deal were Jennings-for-Hirsh straight up, I could understand the Astros' take. Hirsh struggled in the majors, and while it would be premature to condemn him to a career of ineffectiveness, it is possible that he's not the right fit for Houston. Trading him in for a more proven commodity like Jennings would be understandable, although it would be a big risk to give up on Hirsh so quickly.
  The problem is that the Astros -- a team that really needs pitching depth -- actually sacrificed their pitching depth in this deal. Trading away two starting pitching prospects, both of whom have already reached the majors, for one starting pitcher, is hard to understand -- especially when the pitcher you're getting isn't an All-Star at all.
  The other pitcher in the deal, Taylor Buchholz, isn't nearly as promising as Hirsh. Buchholz hasn't had a quality season since 2003 in Double-A. Since then, his K rate has degenerated to unimpressive levels, and he allows far too many walks and home runs to compensate. Buchholz made 19 starts with Houston last year, posting a 5.89 ERA and showing off all of the marginal peripherlas he'd shown in the minors. At age 25, there's little reason to expect much from Buchholz, especially since he's going to a ballpark that will exacerbate his problems.
  Willy Taveras may be an overrated player, but he's still got his high points. He sports as empty a batting average as you'll find (career 284/329/340 hitter), and also steals bases (68/88 in the majors), but not enough to help much. His biggest strength is defense. Taveras looks like a heck of a center fielder out there, and the numbers back up that claim. Taveras is 33 Fielding Runs Above Average in his two full major league seasons, which is phenomenal. If the Astros weren't already stocked with punchless glove men, Taveras might be worth keeping as a cheap alternative.
  
  So: is it worth giving up Hirsh, Buchholz, and Taveras to get Jennings?
  I don't think so. I think Jennings is underrated, and should look better in Houston. The problem will be that he's just under the Astros control for a year, and if they do sign a long-term contract, they be well-told to do it later in the season to see how Jennings takes to the Juice Box.
  Hirsh may have his issues as a pitcher (he's also going to be 25), but he's the best the Astros have. He's cheap and is, in my mind, worth the risk. In my mind, you'd have to give up Hirsh for a pitcher who was demonstrably better. And it's hard to make that case for Jennings, especially in the long term.
  Buchholz doesn't have a lot of upside, but even a fifth starter would be valuable to Houston if he could eat up some innings.
  And while Taveras isn't any sort of complete player, it's hard to believe that the Astros will be a better team without him. They don't have any clear-cut successor on hand, unless they're planning on rushing Hunter Pence right into the starting job (which is possible). If they don't go with Pence, then they'll probably have to go with Chris Burke, which leaves the deteriorating Craig Biggio all alone at second base. Again, more evidence that this move isn't going to do Houston any favors in the short term.
  On the other hand, I kind of like this deal for Colorado. Hirsh may not profile like the best fit for Coors Field, but he does have good control, and any sort of pitching prospect is good news for Colorado. My personal opinion is that they should have kept Jennings, but if they were going to trade him, it's nice to get a valuable pitching prospect and a filler-type young starting pitcher and a new center fielder. Taveras should be more helpful to the Rockies than he was to the Astros. The Rockies look, long-term, like a team that should have a well-balanced offensive attack. Unlike the Astros, they can afford to waste a lineup spot on a glove man, especially if he's a fantastic center fielder roaming one of the widest outfields in baseball.
  The final decision on this trade will have to wait until we see how Jennings is outside of the Denver Bizarro World. But right now, it looks like the Astros gave up a little too much to get not enough in return.
• Several players were not tendered contracts by the deadline, making them free agents. They were mostly marginal players, but some of them were useful guys who could help out a team, such as Aaron Guiel, Victor Zambrano, Brandon Claussen, Chris Reitsma, and Jayson Werth. But only one former All-Star got non-tendered, and it came as a big surprise to me, along with many others.
  The Braves non-tendered Marcus Giles, making him a free agent.
  Giles is far, far more useful than any other player non-tendered. He'll be 29 next year, and is a good-fielding second baseman who hits far above average for the position. Now, it's doubtful that Giles will retain the near-MVP form he showed in 2003 (316/390/526), but there's got to be a market out there for a good-hitting second baseman (career .279 EQA) with a good glove that borders on Gold Glove quality.
  Giles is coming off of a very dismal 2006, where he hit just 262/341/387. Is this perhaps a sign of something worse, and is that why Schuerholz couldn't get a good trade for him? It's possible. Giles' deterioration is partly power-based (he only hit 32 doubles and 11 HR last year), but it was mainly due to a near-30 point drop in his batting average. A his peak, Giles hit over .300, but his average has gone down every year since 2003, and it's possible that this indicates a decrease in bat speed. I watch Braves games more than any team besides the Reds, and while I'm no scout, Giles hasn't seemed as sharp at the plate as he used to. That may just be me rationalizing the stats. But the lack of interest around baseball seems to indicate that there are suspicions surrounding Giles.
  It's really hard to believe that Schuerholz couldn't get something for Giles. He was rumored to be going to San Diego, but that deal never worked out. He may end up there yet. But there are other teams that could use a good second baseman, among them the Mets, Nats (if they can pry away Vidro), Padres, and the Blue Jays, among others.
• It's being reported that the Rangers have reached a 1-year, $6 million contract with Eric Gagne.
  I have mixed feelings about this contract. It's less money than Gagne was rumored to be offered, so it's a much better deal for someone as high-risk as he is. And it's not a lot of money to pay a closer.
  My problem is that the Rangers don't seem to be focused on spending their money in the right places. They already had a closer, in Akinori Otsuka. Otsuka isn't the most reliable closer in the league, but then it seems to me that the Rangers have more pressing issues than giving themselves redundancy in the bullpen. Their starting outfield was Catalanotto/Wilkerson/Nelson Cruz before they signed Kenny Lofton recently. Even with Lofton, their offense isn't as potent as it would seem, and their starting pitching staff is still unimpressive. Even assuming the best-case scenario for Millwood and Padilla, the Rangers still have three spots in their rotation to fill, preferably with people not named Jon Koronka.
  Step 1 is to Identify the Problem. Buying the Player is Step 5 or 6, and you shouldn't jump that far until you've carefully looked at Step 1.
• Miguel Batista is reportedly close to signing a free agent deal for 3 years and $24 million (or $27 million, depending upon who you ask). Those numbers look oddly like contracts that were being signed last season, before the big salary inflation. Batista is basically a LAIM at this point in his career, although there are some troubling signs in his performance over the past few years. His walk rates and strikeout rates have gone in the wrong directions since his career year in 2003. Now, Batista has never had good numbers in that regard, so it's not automatically a reason to suspect his performance. But he's turning 35 next February and is coming off a year of a 4.58 ERA and a 84:110 BB:K ratio in 206.1 IP. He's not the kind of pitcher I would want to sign to this kind of contract, but considering the circumstances, it's not the worst deal of the offseason by any means. The most important thing here is that the Mariners limited themselves to just 3 years. 2 years would have been better, but that's probably wishful thinking.
  But the real trouble here isn't the contract, it's the team that signed it. The Mariners really aren't in any position to sign a risky contract. They're a team that needs to build up a strong foundation of some reliable players before they start going out and speculating. The problem is that the Mariners' downside is still last place by a good margin, and the signing of Batista commits a lot of money without significant changing that. The Mariners need more reliable players and safer contracts; they don't need any more Adrian Beltres.
  If the Yankees had signed this contract, I wouldn't be so negative. The Yankees aren't looking for one pitcher to save them, and they're also fiscally capable of absorbing the loss. But the Mariners are neither of these things. Batista doesn't strongly increase their upside, but he does increase the risk of another season of sunk costs and bad contracts.
  A lot of this is probably rooted in the Mariners' desperation. The M's were criticized for not being active at the Winter Meetings. And there's no better setup for a bad contract than when a GM is pressured to do something. GM Bill Bavasi is especially anxious, considered by many to be on the hot seat this year. And with the team struggling despite having made serious commitments to Adrian Beltre, Richie Sexson, and Jarrod Washburn, Bavasi is about to become the fall guy. And for the most part, that's probably justified.
• Jeff Bagwell is expected to officially announce his retirement this week. I've always been a fan of Bagwell's and never thought he got enough credit for his hitting, especially his 368/451/750 1994.
  But the whispers are starting, and unfortunately, they're probably justified. Bagwell is one player who -- although there's never been any sort of evidence presented against him -- has been strongly suspected of steroid use. We're put in a very unfortunate position when considering Bagwell and the players of his era. On one hand, it's patently unfair to condemn something for suspicions as groundless as these. On the other hand, it would be irresponsible to be naive about the matter and wait for some "smoking gun" that we'll never find.

I'll be back later with my look ahead at the Angels. Only four teams to go!

News bits

The end of the Winter Meetings has seen a good deal of action, almost entirely on the free agent front. All of the deals that nearly happened (Astros getting Jon Garland, Brewers getting Jon Lieber, etc.) far outnumbered the one trade that took place on the final day of the meetings (the Braves fleece the Mariners). Down to business:

• Barry Bonds returns to the Giants for a 1 year, $16 million deal. I'm surprised that Bonds got this much, since the Giants were the only team actively bidding for him. A couple of teams had kicked the tires on Bonds (supposedly the Cardinals), but I don't know of any other offers made for him. So the Giants are once again making 2007 do-or-die, pinning their hopes (and a possible $20 million, with incentives) to Mr. Bonds.
  Honestly, though, they didn't have much choice. The Giants backed themselves into this corner a couple years ago, and Bonds was the only option still out there capable of putting big runs up on the board. Not only do the Giants need him, but this will make things a lot more comfortable if/when Bonds passes Hank Aaron's record. San Francisco will be more receptive than any other city by far to the milestone, and Bonds should know that.
  Bottom line, this was a necessary deal for the Giants, and it's a good thing for them that they made it. I'm just surprised it cost them so much.
• Andy Pettitte will be going back to the Yankees for a 1 year, $16 million. No, I don't think that Andy Pettitte is as valuable as Barry Bonds. But the $16 million was likely a trade-off for keeping the contract to one year. The Yankees, remember haven't spent any money yet this off-season. They've exercised admirable restraint, and so they've got the money to spend on Pettitte. The Yanks need some stability for their starting rotation until prospect Phillip Hughes is ready, and I guess they're ready to pay for it.
  I haven't found out yet who it was that wanted it to be a 1-year deal, the Yanks or Pettitte. Pettitte was supposedly considering retirement this offseason, so he may just want a 1-year commitment. It's also possible that the Yankees don't want to make a long-term commitment to a pitcher who turns 35 next year when they've got the phenom Hughes on the rise.
  It should be noted that Pettitte has a player option for 2008, which is also for $16 million. So if Pettitte wants to play another year, it will be the Yankees on the hook for a rather exorbitant amount.
• Whither Roger Clemens? That's the subtext of any deal for Pettitte. Reports are that if Clemens does play in 2007, it will most likely be with Pettitte, i.e. with the Yankees. This is good news for New York, who could always use a potential ace in the second half of the season. They can also pay the price.
  I've also heard that if the Red Sox fail to sign Daisuke Matsuzaka (which is starting to look more and more likely), they might aggressively target Clemens. This would not only fill their hole in the starting rotation, but help mollify the angry mobs at Fenway.
• Whither the Astros? I've heard from several places that Pettitte was willing to take just $14 million to stay in Houston, but that the Astros wouldn't budge from their offer of $12 million.
  The Astros look really bad now, having lost out on a big-time pitcher for $2 million (which you can find in owner Drayton McLane's couch cushions). It's also bad news, because the Astros need starting pitching much more than the Yankees do. The Astros have been contenders on and off for more than ten years now, but their roster of talent is thinning out, which is why they doled out $100 million of desperation money to Carlos Lee. Understandable, but this is also a starting rotation that currently consists of Roy Oswalt and his Merry Men. The Astros only have one established starting pitcher behind Oswalt, and that's a risky old fellow named Woody Williams. They needed Pettitte bad, and now they're going to have to look for help elsewhere.
  The Astros were rumored to be near a deal for White Sox starter Jon Garland involving Willy Taveras and one of their pitching prospects (Jason Hirsh, Taylor Buchholz), but that fell through at the last minute. In my opinion, it's damn lucky for the Astros that it did. Not that Taveras is any big loss, but there's absolutely no reason to trade out a young pitcher with the promise of Hirsh (or even Buchholz) for an overrated, expensive Jon Garland. The Astros would be much better off suffering through Hirsh and Buchholz's growing pains than paying $22 million for 2 years of LAIM.
  But GM Tim Purpura is most likely going to aggressively hunt for veteran starting pitching, now that he's lost Pettitte. This puts the Astros in a bind, since they're already a team on the way down and can't afford to lose any of the few prospects they have.
  Jayson Stark of ESPN.com suggested that the Astros may have felt pressure not to go whole hog on Pettitte after spending so much on Carlos Lee. The MLB is apparently not too thrilled with that contract. Really Mr. Selig, if you're angry about salary inflation, don't get mad at Drayton McLane and Carlos Lee. Talk to the Colletti-Pierre connection.
• Ted Lilly has signed with the Cubs for 4 years and $40 mil. Lilly is a prime example of salary inflation at work. His contract isn't nearly as bad as that given to Adam Eaton, but while it's not a total loss, it's still a potential blunder. Lilly doesn't have the advantage of being very good (career 4.56 ERA, ERA+ of 99) or very durable (0 seasons of 200 IP; only 3 seasons of more than 130).
  But you could do a lot worse. Lilly will have the advantage of moving from the AL East to the NL Central, which will knock half a run off his ERA at least. He's just going to be 31 next year, so 4 years isn't too dreadful. And he's perfectly capable of giving you above-average work, just not with great staying power. My guess is that while the Cubs may end up regretting the contract, Lilly will probably give them one or two good years. And with a starting rotation pretty bare behind Carlos Zambrano, the Cubs need that.
• If Ted Lilly's contract is understandable, Gil Meche's contract isn't. It's easily the worst contract given to a pitcher this off-season and even rivals the Double-Uglies of Matthews, Jr. & Pierre.
  The Royals will be paying Meche for $55 million for 5 years. Even in context, this is absurd; Gil Meche isn't nearly as good as Ted Lilly or Jason Schmidt, and yet he's getting a longer commitment for more overall money than either man. Meche is pretty much the AL's answer to Adam Eaton, except getting paid more than twice as much.
  Meche, spending his entire career in a pitcher's park, hasn't had a better-than-average ERA since 2000. He was barely average in 2003 and 2006, and even then he didn't throw 200 innings (he's never topped 186.2). Sandwiched between that were two pretty awful seasons in 2004 and 2005 (5.01 ERA, 5.09 ERA). Meche did set a new career high in strikeouts last year with 156; he also set a career high in walks (84). Three times he's allowed more than 20 HR in a season (he allowed 30 overall in '03), despite never throwing many innings and enjoying the spacious confines of Safeco Field.
  Meche is a pretty bad pitcher with little room to improve. And he's been given a huge contract from perhaps the one team in baseball that can least afford it.
  I've heard two main defenses of the Meche deal. One is that, at age 28, Meche is one of the youngest pitchers on the free agent market. But youth is irrelevant if it doesn't also equal quality. Meche's youth indicates that he won't start deteriorating for a while yet. Which is great, because he doesn't have much room to deteriorate.
  The other defense is that the Royals are trying to spend money to lure free agents to the club. Kansas City isn't a very attractive destination for free agents, and the Royals are trying to solve this problem with money.
  Bad idea.
  A lot of parallels have been drawn with the Tigers, who went out and spent a lot of money after losing 119 games and ended up winning the pennant. Bad comparison. The Tigers overpaid yes -- but they overpaid on good players like Ivan Rodriguez and Magglio Ordonez. If the Royals had overpaid to bring in Jason Schmidt or even Ted Lilly, this would have been more understandable. But there is no realistic way to justify giving a lot of money to a marginal player.
  The next few years will see the Royals trying desperately to justify Meche's deal. Just wait: if Meche gets off to a good start this year, even if only for a month, everyone will say that the deal is turning out well for the Royals. But I'm not a big fan of looking for silver linings where they don't exist. The Royals just spent more than last year's entire payroll ($47.3 million) to get a player that could be replaced by half a dozen Triple-A pitchers. Not only did they get a poor player, they spent more money to get him than other teams spent to get infinitely better pitchers such as Schmidt and even Lilly.
  There is no positive way to spin this deal. That's not to say that Meche won't have a good year or maybe even two -- but the Royals just can't justify committing this much money to such a player. They may think they're seeing light at the end of the tunnel, but that's not a tunnel; it's a hole.
• The White Sox traded Freddy Garcia the Phillies for Gavin Floyd & Gio Gonzalez. This works out fairly well for both clubs; Garcia was expensive and easily replaceable by Brandon McCarthy. The Phillies need starting pitching desperately (preferably those that can keep the ball on the ground) and are probably getting a bargain in Garcia, who's only under contract for one more year.
  The Phillies didn't have to give up a whole lot for him. That's partially because of the one-year commitment, but also because Garcia is coming off a bad year with some troubling peripherals. But I think that Garcia -- who's been pretty reliable throughout his career in terms of both quality and productivity -- is a good pickup for Philadelphia.
  Gavin Floyd is a top-shelf talent who hasn't yet turned that into major league production. It was starting to look like Floyd was never going to get big league hitters out in Philadelphia. But he's young yet (24 next year) and not a bad guy to take a chance on. Gonzalez is a good pitching prospect that the White Sox actually developed themselves; they sent him to Philadelphia last year in the Aaron Rowand deal, and are now getting him back. The acquisition of two pitching prospects may make someone else expendable, as evidenced by GM Kenny Williams' attempts to trade Jon Garland to Houston.
  My only problem with this deal is that I wonder if the White Sox couldn't have gotten more for Garcia. This deal hurts them in the short run, but not as much as people have said; the difference between Garcia's performance next year and that of Brandon McCarthy isn't likely to be too far apart, and the long-term advantages were worth making the trade. But I wonder if Williams couldn't have gotten more for a legitimate #2 pitcher (or #3, if you're skeptical) in a market like this. But I don't know; maybe this was the best he could get.
• Luis Gonzalez signed a 1-year deal with the Dodgers for $7 million to take over as their left fielder. Now Gonzalez isn't the player he once was, but he's still pretty productive, as evidenced by his 52 doubles and .352 OBP last year. It's not a lot of money, really. And it would be a great deal for a team that really needed a left fielder.
  But the Dodgers don't need a left fielder. They especially don't need a left fielder with very little defensive value who throws a baseball like it's a shot put. They've already got, in Matt Kemp, a young prospect who looks perfectly capable of ascending to the major leagues -- and for the minimum salary, no less.
  This is another example of GM Ned Colletti's neglect (or ignorance) of his young talent. He's already closed off first base to prospect James Loney by acquiring Nomar Garciaparra; it's debatable whether Garciaparra will hit better than Loney in the short term, without even considering the long term problems of blocking him. He's done the same thing in left field with Gonzalez, although thankfully it's just a 1-year commitment. Still, every step forward looks like Colletti wants to turn this team into the Giants, and that's a very bad thing.
  Luckily, the team shouldn't suffer too much in the short run. Both Nomar and Gonzo are still productive enough, and the sweet Jason Schmidt deal will keep the team contenders. The only real clunker of a contract was the abomination handed out to Juan Pierre. But the long-term implications of Colletti's actions are troubling. Especially when all of the Dodgers' top young talent is rumored to be on the trading block, especially since these free agent deals are rendering them obsolete.
• The Braves traded Horacio Ramirez to Seattle for reliever Rafael Soriano. It was rumored that the Braves were shopping first baseman Adam LaRoche for relief pitching help, but that didn't pan out. Instead, the Braves were able to trade their injury-plagued, non-strikeout-getting #5 starter for one of the best arms in the AL.
  Wha' happen'?
  I guess John Schuerholz just happened in on Mariners GM Bill Bavasi when he was in a particularly gullible mood. Soriano has had some injury problems of his own, it's true, and missed the last part of 2006 after getting hit in the head by a line drive. But while there are some questions about his future, they're more than outweighed by his high upside. Soriano has an electric arm and has produced great relief work for the M's in recent years. Soriano's career ERA (2.89) is 50% better than the league average, even adjusting for his friendly ballpark. And in 171 career innings, he's struck out 177 batters against just 53 walks and 16 HR.
  If there's anything but a ready-made closer here, I don't see what it is.
  Even considering Soriano's injury problems, Bavasi has to get back something better than Horacio Ramirez. The Mariners need starting pitchers, yes, but they don't need to replace Gil Meche with his younger, National League counterpart who strikes out no one (less than 1 K every 2 innings, which is unacceptable in the big leagues, unless you're a freak like Chien-Ming Wang).
  The Braves were entering the season with nearly-retired 38-year old Bob Wickman as closer. And while Wickman might retain that title for a few months, there's no question who their closer of the future is. The Braves just made their future a good deal brighter and didn't have to give up their first baseman for it. Gnarly.
• Matt Stairs has reportedly agreed to a 1 year deal with the Toronto Blue Jays. I haven't confirmed a dollar amount. Stairs is still a useful hitter, especially as a lefty on a team filled with righties. He's also 39, slower than molasses in January, and a defensive impossibility.
  Did the Jays really need another one of these?
• The Giants resigned third baseman Pedro Feliz for a 1-year, $5 million deal. Remember when I said how much trouble the Giants were in if Rich Aurilia was their starting third baseman? Feliz is worse. Feliz isn't bad defensively and does have some power (22 HR last year). But he's also got a career OBP of .288 and a BB:K ratio that would do Dave Kingman proud (33:112 last year). He's going to be 32 and isn't really significantly better than Tony Batista.
  I know I've wondered in this space whether the Giants can get any worse. But I'd like to clarify something for GM Brian Sabean:
  "IT WAS A RHETORICAL QUESTION!"
• The Padres are hoping that Todd Walker will accept arbitration and fill their hole at second base. Walker's glove isn't made; it's smelted. But he's the best offensive solution to second base on the market, and he's a much better idea than giving any sort of multi-year deal to Ronnie Belliard (as the Padres were rumored to be considering). Rumors had the Padres pursuing Braves 2B Marcus Giles via a trade, which would have been great, but you can't always get what you want. The Padres are also trying to talk David Wells out of retirement. It's better than nothing, I guess, but really, how much does Wells have left?

With the Winter Meetings over, it looks like things will be quiet for a time. We'll soon find out who's accepted arbitration from their teams, and we'll also find out who's getting tendered a contract. There could be some interesting names set free, but probably no one more desirable than Kevin Mench.
I should also mention the Rule 5 draft, which took place at the Winter Meetings. The Rule 5 draft enables a team to draft players not on a major league team's 40-man roster. It's a chance for players lost in the minor leagues to get a chance with a new team. The team gets the player for one year and has to keep him one level above where he was drafted (I believe). At the end of the year, the team can either return the player to the old organization or pay a fee to keep him.
One big change in the new CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) extended by one year the number of years a player is exempt from the Rule 5 draft. The draft only includes players with a certain number of years in the minor leagues. It was originally intended not just as a way for teams to look for bargains, but as an avenue for talented players to escape if a team had kept them trapped in the minors (all those Yankee first base prospects from 1925-1938 can identify). Unfortunately, the change in the CBA allows teams to keep players longer, making the Rule 5 draft much less interesting. Most of the players taken were long-shot prospects with only outside chances of contributing.

There's plenty more to come though, as these players are (as of now) still on the market:

Barry Zito, Roger Clemens, Eric Gagne, Miguel Batista, Trot Nixon, Cliff Floyd, Jeff Suppan, Mark Loretta, Keith Foulke, Kenny Lofton and many, many more.

We can also look forward to the public fireworks as the deadline for signing Daisuke Matsuzaka nears. It may be an ugly way to enjoy oneself, but then I'm not always proud of my glee.

Cheers.

Looking Ahead: New York Yankees

A few quick free agent notes:

• The big news is that the Astros signed free agent slugger Carlos Lee to a 6-year, $100 million contract. It's very hard to judge relative value in an offseason where the market is in constant flux. My instinct here is that the Astros are overpaying Lee, but not so much to get too upset about. Lee's deal is much fairer than those given to Soriano, Gary Matthews, and Juan Pierre. Lee's contract is heavily back-loaded, so he should be a good bargain in the first two years but quickly turn into a liability the last four years of the deal, when he'll be making $18.5 million per year. As Keith Law pointed out in his blog, Lee's not the type of player who ages well, so the Astros are gambling a lot by committing so much money to his declining years.
  On the plus side, though, the Astros did at least address what was their biggest weakness: offense. Lee's addition is a significant upgrade to the Houston lineup and improves their 2007 chances by a good margin. They overpaid to get him, but not nearly as much as everyone else is overpaying these days.
• As mentioned above, Gary Matthews, Jr. signed a 5-year, $50 million with the Angels. This is a terrible move for Los Angeles, who can't afford to have any more expensive old guys clogging up the lineup. Matthews' 2006 was a major fluke (313/371/495 compared to a career 263/336/419), and he's not likely to match that production at age 32. This is a big stinker of a contract or a team that can't afford any. The Angels have money to spend, but they won't be able to score any runs if they keep spending it on the likes of Garret Anderson, Darin Erstad, Steve Finley, and Matthews.
• The Diamondbacks traded catcher Johnny Estrada and two pitchers (Greg Aquino and Claudio Vargas)to the Brewers for starting pitcher Doug Davis, relief pitcher Dana Eveland, and outfielder Dave Krynzel. I mentioned before that the D-Backs would be looking to trade Estrada, now that young Miguel Montero looks ready. They addressed their pitching problems, but I'm not sure that they're that much better off. Davis is a better bet than Vargas, but not by that much. Eveland has shown some promise out of the bullpen, and Krynzel is a fourth-outfielder type who could hold down an everyday job if his hitting improves.
  From the Brewers standpoint, this isn't a bad trade. You get a good upgrade at catcher, with Estrada replacing Damian Miller. You also have a younger catcher, with Miller now possible trade bait. The Davis-for-Vargas switch is probably a net loss, but not by too much. Whether the deal works out or not depends a lot upon what (if anything) the Brewers get for Miller.
  This isn't a real winner of a trade for either team, but neither does it especially hurt them.
• There's nothing else of news over this holiday weekend. We may have reached a temporary cooling off period, as teams look back at what it left and reexamine their strategy.

And now, the Yankees:
2006 W-L Record: 97-65
2006 pW-pL Record: 95-67
Runs Scored: 930 (1st in AL -- by far)
Runs Allowed: 767 (4th in AL)
Free Agents: Octavio Dotel, Sidney Ponson, Tanyon Sturtze, Ron Villone, Bernie Williams, Craig Wilson

2007 Projected Lineup:
1B -- Andy Phillips?
2B -- Robinson Cano
SS -- Derek Jeter
3B -- Alex Rodriguez
LF -- Hideki Matsui
CF -- Johnny Damon
RF -- Bobby Abreu
C -- Jorge Posada
DH -- Jason Giambi

2007 Proj. Rotation:
Chien-Ming Wang
Mike Mussina
Randy Johnson
Philip Hughes?
Carl Pavano?!

2007 Proj. Closer: Mariano Rivera

Offense & Defense:
The offense is doing JUST fine, thank you very much. It's still an old bunch, but GM Brian Cashman has done a good job of mix-and-match to keep from putting all of his eggs in one basket. The addition of Bobby Abreu gives the team a more athletic outlook, as does the accession of second baseman Robinson Cano. This is not and was not the greatest lineup ever assembled -- but it was damn good and will be for a few more years, at least.
The only hole the Yankees have is at first base. They would prefer Iron Glove Giambi to move to DH and get someone to play at first. Since they've got such a glut of offense from the rest of the lineup, the Yanks don't have to get a star to play first base. There are a few options that Yanks could use as a short-term fix. The free agent market isn't too promising, although Shea Hillenbrand or Scott Hatteberg wouldn't be a bad short-term fix. They could get creative and re-sign Craig Wilson, or look to convert an outfielder to the position. But the Yanks don't need to start the season with Andy Phillips as the everyday first baseman.

Pitching:
The Yankees finished 4th in the league in pitching last year, which is pretty amazing considering the failures and injuries they had to tolerate from a pretty sorry lot of hurlers. Things don't get a lot better this year, as everyone is just a year older (that's especially dangerous for Randy Johnson). So long as Mariano Rivera stays healthy, the Yankees should be able to get at least average work from their bullpen.
The starting rotation is the question. With Randy Johnson a big question mark, Chien-Ming Wang and Mike Mussina are the only reliable guys the Yankees have. And neither of them are going to be Cy Young contenders. Behind those three, the Yankees still have some holes to fill, either through free agency or a trade.
The Yanks do have big-time pitching prospect Phillip Hughes, but it's doubtful that Hughes will start 2007 in the majors, unless the Yanks are really desperate. Because behind him, all you've got is Carl Pavano, and the Yanks aren't counting on him for anything. I may sound like a broken recordto say so, but as their pitching goes, so go the Yankees.

Off-season Game Plan:
Look for a creative solution at first base -- one that doesn't require a zillion-dollar investment. You'd like to get an improvement over Andy Phillips, but it's not worth paying free agent prices to get it.
Pitching-wise, set your sights on mid-level pitching help. From what I've heard, the Yankees aren't pursuing big-ticket free agents like Barry Zito or Jason Schmidt. While I can understand the fiscal realities behind that, the Yanks also need to realize that their pitching staff is not built for the long-term, and they need to have somebody left when Johnson, Mussina, and Rivera retire.
But under the circumstances, the Yanks would do well to secure someone like Ted Lilly. That would give them a solid (if unspectacular) front four with the possible addition of Phillip Hughes later in the season. It may not sound like much, but with their offense, it doesn't have to be.
The Yankees look like the favorites to repeat in the AL East. Let's just hope they don't trade A-Rod and blow the whole thing to hell.