Dayn Perry's Power Rankings

[anemic offense]

once again, you guys are assuming that everything that went wrong last year was merely bad luck and will reverse itself this year. and everything that went right was not a fluke and will repeat itself.

 

wood and prior missing the whole season won't likely happen, so this argument is pretty meaningless. you may disagree w/ me that missing your #2 and #3 starter for the entire season will cost you seven games, but it's going too far to say that this makes me delusional.

 

and i realize that the team has made upgrades. but i don't think the improvement added thru jones, pierre, howry, eyre, mabry, pagan, and bynum are that substantial, especially when you consider the possible/probable regression of guys like lee.

 

I can understand WHY most people think Lee will regress some, however I don't quite understand why many predict it will hurt this team. Personally, I'd expect his BA to dip a bit (300-310 range), but it was obvious he made an adjustmetn thus it is unlikely he'd revert back to his career norms. With this lineup, I actually think his production totals will INCREASE from last year.

 

I think you VASTLY underestimate the upgrade Pierre provides over Patterson's last year's performance. Corey was an offensive black hole, who was a pretty poor baserunner to boot. Maybe Pierre will never be what he once was, but I don't think this team needs him to be to show significant improvement. Last year this team had the WORST 1-2 combination in all of baseball. Even if Pierr gets on at a .326 clip its 60 to 70 points better then Corey. That's HUGE!!!! That's why I don't understand how you and the experts can underscore this improvement. It's irrelevant whether or not Pierre regressed some last year. The fact is he's GUARANTEED to be better than Patterson. A lot better.

[Jehrico]

 

The improvements this team has made should be worth AT LEAST 7 games (and I'm being ultra conservative here). So if the Cubs don't have Prior and Wood for the whole season (assuming other huge disasters don't occur), this team shouldn't lose 95, or even 90 games. At worst I'd say 83-87. Then again, I didn't think we would have encountered all the misfortunes and poor performances (outside of Wood and Prior) we saw last year either.

 

so you're saying that group A (jones, pierre, eyre, howry, rusch and marshall) are not only as good as group B (burnitz, corey, remlinger, hawkins, prior and wood), but are SEVEN WINS BETTER?

 

now who's being ridiculous?

 

XZero did a superb job of rating the upgrades, but this is how I'd rate this team in comparison to last year's team.

 

Pierre - Huge upgrade over Patterson

Murton - Huge upgrade over LFers from last year

Jones - About the same (albeit in different areas) as Burny

Lee - Slight regression. He DID fix a hole in his swing, therefore I'm not expecting it to be sifnificant.

Aram - About the same as last year, maybe a little better. An entire year of his production should help immmensely.

Barrett - Same as last year.

Cedeno - I expect an improvement over Neifi, although this is far from certain. For arguments sake I'll say he'll give equal offensive production (which shouldn't be hard to do)

2B - It all depends on who gets the most playing time. However I'd think it would be comparabel to last year's production.

 

On the overall for offensive production, we've got roughly 4 washes, 1 slight regression (more BA than anything else), one slight improvement (give more ARam), and huge two upgrades. More importantly, we FINALLY have guys who are capable of scoring runs for our big boppers. This unit pry won't be in the top 4 in RS in the NL, but they should score considerably more than last year. Thus this year's offensive team should be much improved. I'd expect this lineup to be worth at least an exta 5 wins.

 

Dempster - Might not have quite the season of last year, but I don't think his performance was a fluke. Should be about the same with maybe a slight regression.

Eyre - Should be a huge upgrade over last year's performers

Howry - Another upgrade over last year.

Rest of pen - I think they'll be better as well but I'll be conservative and say a wash.

 

Although the bullpen is often the biggest crapshoot in all of sports, I can't imagine the pen being as bad as it was last year. It looks as though we'll finally have some competent setup men capable of getting the games to Dempster. This should be worth at least 3-4 games (and that's being conservative with all the games they blew for us last year) and possibly more depending on the rest of the pen.

 

Zambrano - I expect a slight improvement over last year. Won't have the uncharcteristic meltdowns he experienced last season. With an improved offesne/bullpen he'll win 20 games.

Rusch - I think he'll be competent, but if anyone played out of his mind last year it was him. I expect a moderate regression.

Maddux - Supposedly he's in better shape, but I'm not expecting that to have a lot of bearing on his performance. He should be about the same as he was last year.

Marshall - I think he'll be better than Mitre and company. But for argument's sake I'll say a wash.

Jerome/Guzman - One of these guys will emerge for good and give us what Jerome gave us last year.

 

Assuming Prior and Wood make absolutely ZERO starts this year, I think the staff will at least be pretty comparable to what we got in their absense last year. Prior's loss would be huge, but I don't think Wood's loss would hurt us all that much (I don't think he's pitched all that well since the 2003 playoffs). For now, I'll assume the loss of these two (mainly Prior) will account for an 8 game loss (could be more could be less).

 

Adding up the extra wins/losses, and this year's team would figure to be about a wash with last year's team with Prior and Wood absent (and I'm being conservatively pessimistic). Being estimations aren't perfect, I'll say the margin of error is a +- 4 games, which would put the win total between 75 and 83 wins.

 

Although you may disagree with what I have above I don't think it can be labeled ridiculous. If anything, I think I was fairly conservative.

 

Don't forget that if Miller comes back healthy, and all current reports point towards him being close, he can buffer the loss of Prior or Wood without losing much. Once they're all online, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect 55-60+ starts from those three, which isn't far off of what you'd hope for to get out of your #1 and #2 combined.

 

Cedeno at worst is a wash with last year, because if he's doing worse, Dusty will yank him for Neifi, which is what we had last year.

[XZero771679666304]

once again, you guys are assuming that everything that went wrong last year was merely bad luck and will reverse itself this year. and everything that went right was not a fluke and will repeat itself.

 

wood and prior missing the whole season won't likely happen, so this argument is pretty meaningless. you may disagree w/ me that missing your #2 and #3 starter for the entire season will cost you seven games, but it's going too far to say that this makes me delusional.

 

and i realize that the team has made upgrades. but i don't think the improvement added thru jones, pierre, howry, eyre, mabry, pagan, and bynum are that substantial, especially when you consider the possible/probable regression of guys like lee.

 

Like I said, I think a full year of Aramis will nullify Lee's inevitable regression.

 

What I am struggling with is how you think that going from the worst pen in the league to possibly the best (especially when the pen cost us so many games last year) isn't worth 5-7 wins. I think that's being conservative.

 

No, everthing didn't go bad last year. But outside of Lee, not much went right. Corey had his worst year, Burnitz declined, Walker got hurt, Aramis got hurt, Prior, Wood, Hollandsworth flopped, Lawton went in the toilet after we aquired him, Nomar missed most of the season, a month of good closing was wasted because Dusty went to Hawkins, Hairston was disappointing and he missed time.

 

Neifi had a career month (which really ended up being superfluous), and Lee and Dempster had breakout years. And the impact of Lee's career year was really deadened by the abysmal performances of Patterson, Perez, Macias & Co.

 

The bad break to good break ratio was pretty lopsided, and some of those bad breaks have been removed (Patterson and Macias), and due to conditioning others (Ramirez) are far less likely to occur. Also I think a bad break would be for Pierre to repeat his 2005, which would still qualify as a huge improvement over last year. Also, I don't think Murton could do any worse or even as badly as our LF's did last year, or Cedeno any worse than Perez did. The bullpen, barring an unprecedented rash of injuries, simply cannot be as bad as last year.

 

Any way you cut it, the odds against having anything other than a net gain are astronomical, IMO.

[Catman61]

Pierre - Huge upgrade over Patterson

Murton - Huge upgrade over LFers from last year

Jones - About the same (albeit in different areas) as Burny

Lee - Slight regression. He DID fix a hole in his swing, therefore I'm not expecting it to be sifnificant.

Aram - About the same as last year, maybe a little better. An entire year of his production should help immmensely.

Barrett - Same as last year.

Cedeno - I expect an improvement over Neifi, although this is far from certain. For arguments sake I'll say he'll give equal offensive production (which shouldn't be hard to do)

2B - It all depends on who gets the most playing time. However I'd think it would be comparabel to last year's production.

 

On the overall for offensive production, we've got roughly 4 washes, 1 slight regression (more BA than anything else), one slight improvement (give more ARam), and huge two upgrades. More importantly, we FINALLY have guys who are capable of scoring runs for our big boppers. This unit pry won't be in the top 4 in RS in the NL, but they should score considerably more than last year. Thus this year's offensive team should be much improved. I'd expect this lineup to be worth at least an exta 5 wins

 

In Diamond Mind 2006 simulations

I figured the offense would be worse than it was in 2005. It would be asking a lot for Derrek Lee to put up another monster season, and newcomers Jacque Jones and Juan Pierre aren't projected to be especially good at the plate. The only reason for optimism was a full season from Matt Murton, who posted a .907 OPS in 160 plate appearances a year ago. Sure enough, the Cubs ranked 10th in the league in scoring in our simulations after finished 9th in 2005's real season.

 

The Cubs scored 703 runs in 2005, PECOTA projects the Cubs to score 725 in 2006

 

Both PECOTA and Diamond Mind project the Cubs to have a record of 85-77 in 2006 and that is WITH Prior and Wood making 55-60 starts.

[XZero771679666304]

Pierre - Huge upgrade over Patterson

Murton - Huge upgrade over LFers from last year

Jones - About the same (albeit in different areas) as Burny

Lee - Slight regression. He DID fix a hole in his swing, therefore I'm not expecting it to be sifnificant.

Aram - About the same as last year, maybe a little better. An entire year of his production should help immmensely.

Barrett - Same as last year.

Cedeno - I expect an improvement over Neifi, although this is far from certain. For arguments sake I'll say he'll give equal offensive production (which shouldn't be hard to do)

2B - It all depends on who gets the most playing time. However I'd think it would be comparabel to last year's production.

 

On the overall for offensive production, we've got roughly 4 washes, 1 slight regression (more BA than anything else), one slight improvement (give more ARam), and huge two upgrades. More importantly, we FINALLY have guys who are capable of scoring runs for our big boppers. This unit pry won't be in the top 4 in RS in the NL, but they should score considerably more than last year. Thus this year's offensive team should be much improved. I'd expect this lineup to be worth at least an exta 5 wins

 

In Diamond Mind 2006 simulations

I figured the offense would be worse than it was in 2005. It would be asking a lot for Derrek Lee to put up another monster season, and newcomers Jacque Jones and Juan Pierre aren't projected to be especially good at the plate. The only reason for optimism was a full season from Matt Murton, who posted a .907 OPS in 160 plate appearances a year ago. Sure enough, the Cubs ranked 10th in the league in scoring in our simulations after finished 9th in 2005's real season.

 

The Cubs scored 703 runs in 2005, PECOTA projects the Cubs to score 725 in 2006

 

Both PECOTA and Diamond Mind project the Cubs to have a record of 85-77 in 2006 and that is WITH Prior and Wood making 55-60 starts.

 

After looking at what both of them say about the rest of the bigs, I put next to zero stock in that.

[Catman61]

DMB's 2005 prediction for the Cubs

Chicago Cubs (83-79, division title 1%, wild card 18%)

After coming within three games of the wildcard, the Cubs go into the season minus Sammy Sosa, Moises Alou, Mark Grudzielanek, and Matt Clement. Those are significant losses, but turnover is normal, and the question is whether you took the money you saved on those players and invested it well. They chose to go after Jeromy Burnitz, Jerry Hairston, and Nomar Garciaparra.

 

It sure looks as if the Cubs have lost more than they gained. Even though a lot of things went right for the Chicago offense last year -- pretty good health, better-than-career-norm performances from several players, and the league's second-best park for offense -- they were still only 7th in the league in scoring. A full season from Nomar will be a big boost, but it's not reasonable to expect a combination of Todd Hollandsworth, Jason Dubois, Jerry Hairston, and a Coors-less Jeromy Burnitz to match what Alou and Sosa provided in 2004.

 

Clement was every bit as good as Kerry Wood and Mark Prior last year, so he's a big loss. We've penciled Glendon Rusch into Clement's spot in the rotation, and that's a bit of a gamble. Rusch was surprisingly good in 2004 (6-2, 3.47 in 16 starts and 16 appearances out of the pen), but if he reverts to his career ERA of 4.93, their other options aren't exactly championship quality. And it's very, very hard to get excited about this bullpen. Pitching health is always a key factor for any team, but if the Cubs don't get full seasons of top quality pitching from Wood, Prior, Carlos Zambrano, and Greg Maddux, they're not going anywhere.

 

Just because you don't like what they say doesn't mean thier viewpoint has no merit.

[Soul]

once again, you guys are assuming that everything that went wrong last year was merely bad luck and will reverse itself this year. and everything that went right was not a fluke and will repeat itself.

 

You just gave the definition of homerism.

 

Look, I hope things work out better this year as much as the next Cub fan. But lambasting this guy because he thinks we will struggle without Prior & Wood is silly. Clearly, we will indeed struggle unless we get those two back.

 

As for the rest of his rankings. He's taking a few chances, no question. I'd rather see that though than just another talking head spitting out the lastest conventional wisdom like a puppet. And people would have lambasted him for that, too.

[Catman61]

DMB's 2004 prediction for the Cubs

Chicago Cubs (90-72, division title 25%, wild card 23%)

According to our simulations, this is the best pitching staff in the National League. Among the hurlers who won't be back, only relievers Mark Guthrie and (to a lesser extent) Dave Veres will be missed. Newcomers Greg Maddux and LaTroy Hawkins will more than make up for those losses, especially when you consider that the Maddux starts replace those of Shawn Estes and his 5.73 ERA. With these changes, a staff that finished 3rd in the ERA rankings last year should shave another 30 runs off their total.

 

Ah, but you have to swing the bats, too, and that's why the Cubs aren't prohibitive favorites to win this division. Derrek Lee is the only significant offseason addition to a lineup that was outscored by eight NL teams last year. A full season from Aramis Ramirez at third base will help. But it's hard to see where any other gains will be made, and in our 100 seasons, Chicago added only 18 runs to their 2003 total.

 

Difference makers: If Mark Prior's Achilles problem causes him to miss a few starts, that could be enough to drop Chicago behind Houston ... Maddux, if his pitching expertise rubs off on his new teammates and they soar to even greater heights as a staff ... Corey Patterson, if he continues to develop as quickly as he did last year, or even if he merely consolidates his game at the new level he established

 

2004 predicted 90-72 actual 89-73

2005 predicted 83-79 actual 79-83

[XZero771679666304]

DMB's 2005 prediction for the Cubs

Chicago Cubs (83-79, division title 1%, wild card 18%)

After coming within three games of the wildcard, the Cubs go into the season minus Sammy Sosa, Moises Alou, Mark Grudzielanek, and Matt Clement. Those are significant losses, but turnover is normal, and the question is whether you took the money you saved on those players and invested it well. They chose to go after Jeromy Burnitz, Jerry Hairston, and Nomar Garciaparra.

 

It sure looks as if the Cubs have lost more than they gained. Even though a lot of things went right for the Chicago offense last year -- pretty good health, better-than-career-norm performances from several players, and the league's second-best park for offense -- they were still only 7th in the league in scoring. A full season from Nomar will be a big boost, but it's not reasonable to expect a combination of Todd Hollandsworth, Jason Dubois, Jerry Hairston, and a Coors-less Jeromy Burnitz to match what Alou and Sosa provided in 2004.

 

Clement was every bit as good as Kerry Wood and Mark Prior last year, so he's a big loss. We've penciled Glendon Rusch into Clement's spot in the rotation, and that's a bit of a gamble. Rusch was surprisingly good in 2004 (6-2, 3.47 in 16 starts and 16 appearances out of the pen), but if he reverts to his career ERA of 4.93, their other options aren't exactly championship quality. And it's very, very hard to get excited about this bullpen. Pitching health is always a key factor for any team, but if the Cubs don't get full seasons of top quality pitching from Wood, Prior, Carlos Zambrano, and Greg Maddux, they're not going anywhere.

 

Just because you don't like what they say doesn't mean thier viewpoint has no merit.

 

I was referring mostly to PECOTA, and to this year's predictions. And for the record, I would have agreed the the above prediction a year ago.

[Catman61]

I was referring mostly to PECOTA, and to this year's predictions. And for the record, I would have agreed the the above prediction a year ago.

 

True, PECOTA regresses EVERYONE to the mean so I generally don't pay much attention to the predicted W-L records and just to predicted standings

[Knyption]

The team this year is not going to be anything special barring a couple fluke years or absolutely amazing performances by the young guys.

 

That said, 85 wins would be lucky

[Jehrico]

DMB's 2004 prediction for the Cubs

Chicago Cubs (90-72, division title 25%, wild card 23%)

According to our simulations, this is the best pitching staff in the National League. Among the hurlers who won't be back, only relievers Mark Guthrie and (to a lesser extent) Dave Veres will be missed. Newcomers Greg Maddux and LaTroy Hawkins will more than make up for those losses, especially when you consider that the Maddux starts replace those of Shawn Estes and his 5.73 ERA. With these changes, a staff that finished 3rd in the ERA rankings last year should shave another 30 runs off their total.

 

Ah, but you have to swing the bats, too, and that's why the Cubs aren't prohibitive favorites to win this division. Derrek Lee is the only significant offseason addition to a lineup that was outscored by eight NL teams last year. A full season from Aramis Ramirez at third base will help. But it's hard to see where any other gains will be made, and in our 100 seasons, Chicago added only 18 runs to their 2003 total.

 

Difference makers: If Mark Prior's Achilles problem causes him to miss a few starts, that could be enough to drop Chicago behind Houston ... Maddux, if his pitching expertise rubs off on his new teammates and they soar to even greater heights as a staff ... Corey Patterson, if he continues to develop as quickly as he did last year, or even if he merely consolidates his game at the new level he established

 

2004 predicted 90-72 actual 89-73

2005 predicted 83-79 actual 79-83

 

Interesting how 2004 was off by one game, and in 2005, they're prediction was about on what we should have won if you consider the runs we scored vs the runs we gave up. However, their '05 prediction, if I recall correctly, counted on healthy seasons from Wood and Prior as well. We performed about how they predicted without getting the starts from those two that they predicted we'd need.

[Soul]

On 2nd thought, maybe picking Detroit over Cleveland isn't so outrageous.

 

Sabathia just went down with injury. Not sure how serious yet, but it looked like some kind of strain.

[Banedon]

Just in case there was still a question about it...from Dayn Perry's opening day diary:

 

Awesome. I'm a Cardinals fan, and I'm of course interested in Jimmy Rollins' hit streak, and the only game I can't find anywhere on satellite is St. Louis-Philly. Grrr.

[stitchface]

on second thought, perhaps he underrated detroit. 5-0 all on the road. team ERA around 2 - mind you this after two games in Texas.

[Warpticon]

on second thought, perhaps he underrated detroit. 5-0 all on the road. team ERA around 2 - mind you this after two games in Texas.

 

And if Detroit got hot for 5 games in the middle of July, nobody would be making such a huge deal about it.

[stitchface]

on second thought, perhaps he underrated detroit. 5-0 all on the road. team ERA around 2 - mind you this after two games in Texas.

 

And if Detroit got hot for 5 games in the middle of July, nobody would be making such a huge deal about it.

 

of course not, but they have justified their ranking.

[Warpticon]

on second thought, perhaps he underrated detroit. 5-0 all on the road. team ERA around 2 - mind you this after two games in Texas.

 

And if Detroit got hot for 5 games in the middle of July, nobody would be making such a huge deal about it.

 

of course not, but they have justified their ranking.

 

I don't think a hot stretch of less than 5% of the season justifies anything. For all of Detroit's hotness, they're an entire one game ahead of Cleveland. Nobody has justified their rankings yet.

 

I am happy I started Verlander today, though.

[stitchface]

on second thought, perhaps he underrated detroit. 5-0 all on the road. team ERA around 2 - mind you this after two games in Texas.

 

And if Detroit got hot for 5 games in the middle of July, nobody would be making such a huge deal about it.

 

of course not, but they have justified their ranking.

 

I don't think a hot stretch of less than 5% of the season justifies anything. For all of Detroit's hotness, they're an entire one game ahead of Cleveland. Nobody has justified their rankings yet.

 

I am happy I started Verlander today, though.

 

the rankings are real-time. for the first week, the tigers and brewers are 1-2.

[Warpticon]

the rankings are real-time. for the first week, the tigers and brewers are 1-2.

 

Ah, I thought we were still talking about the preseason rankings. That changes things.

[Jehrico]

on second thought, perhaps he underrated detroit. 5-0 all on the road. team ERA around 2 - mind you this after two games in Texas.

 

And if Detroit got hot for 5 games in the middle of July, nobody would be making such a huge deal about it.

 

of course not, but they have justified their ranking.

 

If he's not an idiot because Detroit has played well, then he's an idiot for picking us and Cincy towards the bottom of the chart, as our two teams are a collective 7-2, with our two losses coming when we played each other.

 

Either way, he's still an idiot. I still stand by my assertion that Dayn Perry is the dumbest sports writer for a nationally syndicated sports venue in the country.

[Jehrico]

the rankings are real-time. for the first week, the tigers and brewers are 1-2.

 

Ah, I thought we were still talking about the preseason rankings. That changes things.

 

The original ranking that was blasted to start this thread was before opening day.

[Warpticon]

the rankings are real-time. for the first week, the tigers and brewers are 1-2.

 

Ah, I thought we were still talking about the preseason rankings. That changes things.

 

The original ranking that was blasted to start this thread was before opening day.

 

yes, before opening day. AKA....preseason. I'm not understanding the purpose of this statement?

[BigbadB]

Detroit could surprise a bit this year. Granderson is supposed to be the real deal. Shelton is playing his first full season. Maggs appears to be healthy. Pudge and Guillen are coming off of down years and are typically much better than they were last year. Polanco and Inge are nice role players.

 

The addition of Kenny Rogers, Bonderman now has major league experience, and Verlander could be a ROY candidate. They have a solid bench and no real weakness except maybe middle relief.

 

If they stay healthy, they are not an "easy" series for anyone.

[YearofDaCubs]

Detroit could surprise a bit this year. Granderson is supposed to be the real deal. Shelton is playing his first full season. Maggs appears to be healthy. Pudge and Guillen are coming off of down years and are typically much better than they were last year. Polanco and Inge are nice role players.

 

The addition of Kenny Rogers, Bonderman now has major league experience, and Verlander could be a ROY candidate. They have a solid bench and no real weakness except maybe middle relief.

 

If they stay healthy, they are not an "easy" series for anyone.

I have to agree with you. Their offense is starting to become scary.