The 2006 team and the 2007 team

[TheDude]

I've read in numerous threads from a variety of people, enough to suggest there is a standing position out there, that the 2007 team as of today is about the same as the 2006 team.

 

I'm looking for opinions on either side of that evaluation.

 

I'm of the opinion that, regardless of metric (VORP, Win Shares, PECOTA, etc) and how the analysis is done, the 2007 team has marginal improvements across the board, with 2 impact improvements.

 

2007 Lilly at 32 starts > 2006 Maddux + Mateo at 32 starts

2007 Miller/Prior at 35 starts > 2006 Marshall + Marmol at 35 starts

2007 Guzman/Marmol/Marshall at spot starts > 2006 Guzman/Marshall/Marmol at emergency/rookie starts

 

2007 Murton/Jones/Soriano OF > 2006 Murton/Pierre/Jones OF

2007 Lee 1B > 2006 Lee + Nevin + Walker + Mabry 1B

2007 DeRosa 2B > 2006 Perez + Cedeno + Walker + Hairston 2B

2007 Izturis SS > 2006 Cedeno + Perez SS

 

The two impact improvements are Soriano and a fully healthy Lee.

 

Naturally the team has room for improvements still. And there are gambles (Hill in the rotation is the biggest). But this current team features better production, far more stability, and better splits management and player versatility.

 

Is there anyone that trully feels the 2007 team isn't a better team? Can this position be supported by any evaluation?

[Guest]

There is someone who thinks the team is not improved from 2006? Do you have a link or something to these posts?

[Electron Blue]

There is someone who thinks the team is not improved from 2006? Do you have a link or something to these posts?

 

"

 

I haven't heard that claim from anyone. Many have said we're still just a .500 team, but that's as pessimistic as I've seen. We're better, if nothing else; if absolutely nothing else, we're not as bad as 2006.

[TheDude]

There is someone who thinks the team is not improved from 2006? Do you have a link or something to these posts?

 

I can't recall which threads I've read it in, as they grow so large this time of year it's not worth tracking down.

 

Even if someone thinks the team is improved, but .500 or sub-.500, I'd like to hear why.

[Guest]

There is someone who thinks the team is not improved from 2006? Do you have a link or something to these posts?

 

I can't recall which threads I've read it in, as they grow so large this time of year it's not worth tracking down.

 

Even if someone thinks the team is improved, but .500 or sub-.500, I'd like to hear why.

 

 

The argument for .500 is that the team had a long way to go - .500 is what 15 wins better than last year? That's a lot. The pitching staff isn't much better on paper and the offense has basically improved at two positions. Personally, I see about 85 wins as likely for this team with a possibility of anywhere from 78 to 92.

[biittner77]

I've read in numerous threads from a variety of people, enough to suggest there is a standing position out there, that the 2007 team as of today is about the same as the 2006 team.

 

 

2007 Lilly at 32 starts > 2006 Maddux + Mateo at 32 starts

2007 Miller/Prior at 35 starts > 2006 Marshall + Marmol at 35 starts

2007 Guzman/Marmol/Marshall at spot starts > 2006 Guzman/Marshall/Marmol at emergency/rookie starts

 

2007 Murton/Jones/Soriano OF > 2006 Murton/Pierre/Jones OF

2007 Lee 1B > 2006 Lee + Nevin + Walker + Mabry 1B

2007 DeRosa 2B > 2006 Perez + Cedeno + Walker + Hairston 2B

2007 Izturis SS > 2006 Cedeno + Perez SS

The two impact improvements are Soriano and a fully healthy Lee.

 

Naturally the team has room for improvements still. And there are gambles (Hill in the rotation is the biggest). But this current team features better production, far more stability, and better splits management and player versatility.

 

Is there anyone that trully feels the 2007 team isn't a better team? Can this position be supported by any evaluation?

 

It's not a question of better but how much better. In order to be meaningful the 2007 team will have to be 25 games better.

 

The bolded parts could probably be = instead of >

[TheDude]

I've read in numerous threads from a variety of people, enough to suggest there is a standing position out there, that the 2007 team as of today is about the same as the 2006 team.

 

 

2007 Lilly at 32 starts > 2006 Maddux + Mateo at 32 starts

2007 Miller/Prior at 35 starts > 2006 Marshall + Marmol at 35 starts

2007 Guzman/Marmol/Marshall at spot starts > 2006 Guzman/Marshall/Marmol at emergency/rookie starts

 

2007 Murton/Jones/Soriano OF > 2006 Murton/Pierre/Jones OF

2007 Lee 1B > 2006 Lee + Nevin + Walker + Mabry 1B

2007 DeRosa 2B > 2006 Perez + Cedeno + Walker + Hairston 2B

2007 Izturis SS > 2006 Cedeno + Perez SS

The two impact improvements are Soriano and a fully healthy Lee.

 

Naturally the team has room for improvements still. And there are gambles (Hill in the rotation is the biggest). But this current team features better production, far more stability, and better splits management and player versatility.

 

Is there anyone that trully feels the 2007 team isn't a better team? Can this position be supported by any evaluation?

 

It's not a question of better but how much better. In order to be meaningful the 2007 team will have to be 25 games better.

 

The bolded parts could probably be = instead of >

 

No, I don't think they can, unless you are assuming worst case scenario only when projecting 2007. The raw number for 2006 or 3-year splits (when possible - we are dealing with a lot of rookies in there) show definitive improvement.

[Tracer Bullet]

I've read in numerous threads from a variety of people, enough to suggest there is a standing position out there, that the 2007 team as of today is about the same as the 2006 team.

 

 

2007 Lilly at 32 starts > 2006 Maddux + Mateo at 32 starts

2007 Miller/Prior at 35 starts > 2006 Marshall + Marmol at 35 starts

2007 Guzman/Marmol/Marshall at spot starts > 2006 Guzman/Marshall/Marmol at emergency/rookie starts

 

2007 Murton/Jones/Soriano OF > 2006 Murton/Pierre/Jones OF

2007 Lee 1B > 2006 Lee + Nevin + Walker + Mabry 1B

2007 DeRosa 2B > 2006 Perez + Cedeno + Walker + Hairston 2B

2007 Izturis SS > 2006 Cedeno + Perez SS

The two impact improvements are Soriano and a fully healthy Lee.

 

Naturally the team has room for improvements still. And there are gambles (Hill in the rotation is the biggest). But this current team features better production, far more stability, and better splits management and player versatility.

 

Is there anyone that trully feels the 2007 team isn't a better team? Can this position be supported by any evaluation?

 

It's not a question of better but how much better. In order to be meaningful the 2007 team will have to be 25 games better.

 

The bolded parts could probably be = instead of >

 

No, I don't think they can, unless you are assuming worst case scenario only when projecting 2007. The raw number for 2006 or 3-year splits (when possible - we are dealing with a lot of rookies in there) show definitive improvement.

 

That's the cup-half-full view. Those bolded parts might end up being better, might be equal, could even be a little worse in some cases.

 

Overall, the team is certainly improved. But I don't think we can say definitively that it's improved at every single position.

[soapy]

I don't think anyone believes this team isn't improved. There is a debate about how much they've improved though.

 

2007 Lilly at 32 starts > 2006 Maddux + Mateo at 32 starts

Probably a little, but by how much? Lilly is a real question mark. He could have a lot of trouble being a fly-ball pitcher in the NL central.

 

2007 Miller/Prior at 35 starts > 2006 Marshall + Marmol at 35 starts

Possible improvement. It's entirely possible that Miller and Prior will be injured and/or ineffective in 2007. They are both big gambles.

 

2007 Guzman/Marmol/Marshall at spot starts > 2006 Guzman/Marshall/Marmol at emergency/rookie starts

Agreed. Probably a moderate improvement with experience.

 

2007 Murton/Jones/Soriano OF > 2006 Murton/Pierre/Jones OF

It's an improvement, but IF Soriano reverts back to his 2004-2005 numbers, it's not the impact improvement you are counting on. Is that likely? Maybe not if he's really developed more patience, but I don't that's a given.

 

2007 Lee 1B > 2006 Lee + Nevin + Walker + Mabry 1B

Clearly

 

2007 DeRosa 2B > 2006 Perez + Cedeno + Walker + Hairston 2B

Same thing as Soriano. There a decent chance that DeRosa is better, but his 2006 could very well be a fluke. Again, we're hoping that one big year (at age 30?) is a trend and not an aberation.

 

2007 Izturis SS > 2006 Cedeno + Perez SS

Maybe. Izturis has shown he can be really awful with the bat. I mean like Ronnie Cedeno/Neifi Perez awful. He's also had a lot of injury problems the last two years.

 

 

So, yeah, this team certainly is better than the 2006 team, IMO. I'm just not sure they are much more then a .500 team. They certainly could be a 90+ win team with some breaks (Prior, Hill, Soriano, DeRosa, Miller, Lilly, young pitchers, Wood). But they could just as easily head south if those things don't break their way.

[Backtobanks]

I think the 2007 Cubs will be better than the 2006 Cubs, but there are lots of question marks. If by some miracle Prior returns to health, I don't think a 90 win season is out of the question. Also, the Cubs (along with most of the teams) are not a finished product yet, so we have to wait and see who else they might get and which players might show something in spring training.

[TheDude]

So, yeah, this team certainly is better than the 2006 team, IMO. I'm just not sure they are much more then a .500 team. They certainly could be a 90+ win team with some breaks (Prior, Hill, Soriano, DeRosa, Miller, Lilly, young pitchers, Wood). But they could just as easily head south if those things don't break their way.

 

The numbers say these are upgrades before applying variables.

 

There are a lot of casual observations that can be made. For example, with Lilly, while the observation can be made that he doesn't fit in Wrigley with his pitching style, the observation can also be made that he won't pitch 30% of his games against the Yankees and Red Sox, as has been done for 3 years running. Talk about stacked numbers.

 

With a guy like Lilly, those variables probably cancel out or come close (PECOTA puts a lot of value on Lilly's move to the NL though). So when I made the observation that Lilly is better than Maddux + AAA pitcher, I used straight numbers.

 

That's how I approached it. Straight numbers, variables aside.

[soapy]

So, yeah, this team certainly is better than the 2006 team, IMO. I'm just not sure they are much more then a .500 team. They certainly could be a 90+ win team with some breaks (Prior, Hill, Soriano, DeRosa, Miller, Lilly, young pitchers, Wood). But they could just as easily head south if those things don't break their way.

 

The numbers say these are upgrades before applying variables.

 

There are a lot of casual observations that can be made. For example, with Lilly, while the observation can be made that he doesn't fit in Wrigley with his pitching style, the observation can also be made that he won't pitch 30% of his games against the Yankees and Red Sox, as has been done for 3 years running. Talk about stacked numbers.

 

With a guy like Lilly, those variables probably cancel out or come close (PECOTA puts a lot of value on Lilly's move to the NL though). So when I made the observation that Lilly is better than Maddux + AAA pitcher, I used straight numbers.

 

That's how I approached it. Straight numbers, variables aside.

 

I can understand that, but I think it's important to consider those variables at some point. Some of these guys are coming off career years they may not be able to repeat (Soriano, DeRosa, Barrett) and some are coming off of terrible seasons and/or injuries (Prior, Miller, Izturis, Lee).

[goonys evil twin]

The team to me, right now, looks a lot like last year's team, plus Soriano. That's an improvement. But it's not much. There's room for health related improvement as well. But I wasn't very optimistic about the 2006 team on opening day (pre Lee injury), and I'm not a whole lot more optimistic about the 2007 team, right now.

 

I believe this team has to figure out a way to field either a great rotation, or great lineup (if not both - and at this price why not?). And they aren't there yet. A completely healthy Miller, Prior and Wood changes that in an instant. But we aren't in a position to even think that's possible.

 

Last year's team was awful. A fully healthy Lee probably doesn't even mean .500, and might have been no better than a 75 win team.

 

I'm really not going to get into win total predictions at this time. But I think this team has to rely on a lot of breaks, both internal (health, guys not reverting/declining) and external (the competition has to be weak) for significant success right now.

 

It's better, but better isn't good enough, not even close. Hendry made his bed. I'm not going to be happy with him improving this team, because he made it bad in the first place. He needs to make this a great team to deserve any sort of credit.

[mjuedes]

If we can be a .500 team in the NL Central, that would be fantastic. The Cardinals are the reigning world Series champs and they were 1 game over. This team is improved offensively, managerially, but the pitching is the big ? We have 1 proven starter and then 4 ? marks after that. Hill could be an 18-20 game winner or he could be the guy with a 7.00 ERA, and lets just hope Hendry and his hospital bed know something more than we do about Lilly. As for the rest of the rotation, just pray for health!

[goonys evil twin]

If we can be a .500 team in the NL Central, that would be fantastic.

 

There would be nothing fantastic about it. It might be enough to win the division (far from a lock), but that's not really much of an accomplishment.

[A New Era]

You forgot one big one.

 

HILL all year >>>>>>>>>> bad hill half year, and not a full year either.

 

And there's all sorts of things that could happen. Theroit could step up and produce and replace izturis, Derosa COULD have figured out his swing and be an above average 2B, Miller could supprise alot of people, Wood could be a lights out releiver. Pie could light up ST and make an impact, one of the "rookies" could step up arise to stardom.

 

The Cubs certainly have alot of good future pitching in their system. Some of them whom could be very close. And I think the offense is now good enough , and the rotation much more stable compared to last year, to support an experement for a short time.

[TruffleShuffle]

HILL all year >>>>>>>>>> bad hill half year, and not a full year either.

 

Boy, I sure hope so. I'm still nervous though - probably just because it's the Cubs.

[A New Era]

HILL all year >>>>>>>>>> bad hill half year, and not a full year either.

 

Boy, I sure hope so. I'm still nervous though - probably just because it's the Cubs.

 

The last 8-10 games Hill pitched. He looked like an Ace. He pitched with utter DOMINANCE and he had a look of such confidence. That's all he needed. He does have the #'s in the minors to show for his talent, doesn't he?

 

And anyway, just look at the pitchers that have come out of the Cubs system. Zambrano, Prior and Wood got injured, but it just shows you we have great pitching. And I think there are more to come. We've just gotta keep these guys healthy, and not overwork them. I trust Piniella to do that.

[UK1679666180]

I have them at 82-86 wins right now with the addition of Lilly.

[danonwaveland]

I don't know how much difference this will make, but another difference:

 

Lou>>>>Dusty

 

Should be smarter game strategy, more enthusiasm, and, maybe???, more attention to basic skills, like baserunning and defense.

 

Is it time for pitchers and catchers to report yet???

[Fro]

I don't know how much difference this will make, but another difference:

 

Lou>>>>Dusty

 

Should be smarter game strategy, more enthusiasm, and, maybe???, more attention to basic skills, like baserunning and defense.

 

I think you pick up 10 games there alone just by replacing Dusty with Lou.

[Rob]

I don't know how much difference this will make, but another difference:

 

Lou>>>>Dusty

 

Should be smarter game strategy, more enthusiasm, and, maybe???, more attention to basic skills, like baserunning and defense.

 

Is it time for pitchers and catchers to report yet???

 

I don't know about smarter game strategy... I just read somewhere that Lou was thinking of batting Izturis 2nd.

[AramisRamirez]

 

2007 Miller/Prior at 35 starts > 2006 Marshall + Marmol at 35 starts

 

 

i would never in a million years count of wade miller and mark prior combining for 35 starts. i wouldnt count on anything more than 1 single start for the entire seaon out of both of them combined. i have said this countless times, but for us to pencil in prior/wade for anything is insane...let alone 35 starts. in my opinion, i wouldnt even act like either exist and we should plan on neither being on the roster and IF we get anything out of either of them its a bonus. i also would include wood into that category and just plan on him riding the pine for the entire 2007 season.

[Sarcastic]

 

2007 Miller/Prior at 35 starts > 2006 Marshall + Marmol at 35 starts

 

 

i would never in a million years count of wade miller and mark prior combining for 35 starts. i wouldnt count on anything more than 1 single start for the entire seaon out of both of them combined. i have said this countless times, but for us to pencil in prior/wade for anything is insane...let alone 35 starts. in my opinion, i wouldnt even act like either exist and we should plan on neither being on the roster and IF we get anything out of either of them its a bonus. i also would include wood into that category and just plan on him riding the pine for the entire 2007 season.

 

I can see making an argument for why Wood, Prior, and Miller will be unlikely to have many effective innings for the Cubs this season, but I still have no idea what it means to plan for them to be injured. There is no way to plan for three talented pitchers to be injured, unless you want to raise the payroll by $30 million.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

All of our pitchers will win 30 games. That's right, all 12 of them.