BP's early season record projections

[Guest]

okay - like I thought, these projections mean little to nothing except for the people that want to believe we'll suck this year.

[wvcbxl]

okay - like I thought, these projections mean little to nothing except for the people that want to believe we'll suck this year.

 

Well, there's plenty of those.

[Vinestal]

okay - like I thought, these projections mean little to nothing except for the people that want to believe we'll suck this year.

What exactly is it that would cause you to believe anything other than that we will be a mediocre team? Id rather we sucked than be mediocre at least then we'd have a better draft position. We aren't going to suck but we arent going to make the playoffs either so whats the point?

[Radar3454]

here is another one - has us at 84 wins which would at least put us in contention for the WC

 

http://rlyw.blogspot.com/2010/01/extremely-early-2010-mlb-projected.html

[dew1679666265]

okay - like I thought, these projections mean little to nothing except for the people that want to believe we'll suck this year.

What exactly is it that would cause you to believe anything other than that we will be a mediocre team? Id rather we sucked than be mediocre at least then we'd have a better draft position. We aren't going to suck but we arent going to make the playoffs either so whats the point?

 

I don't see why we absolutely can't make the playoffs. We need some good health from guys like Aramis and Z and rebounds from Soriano and Soto, but none of that is unreasonable or even unlikely.

 

I see this team as having a wide range of possibilities. If injuries and lack of rebounds hit us, we could be mediocre to bad. But if the things I mentioned earlier happen, there's no reason this team can't win 90 games and win the division and compete for the World Series. It's a talented team with lots of questions. The answers to those questions will determine our year, I think.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

okay - like I thought, these projections mean little to nothing except for the people that want to believe we'll suck this year.

What exactly is it that would cause you to believe anything other than that we will be a mediocre team?

 

Because we're going to have the best pitching and probably the best offense in the division.

[Deder]

 

Because we're going to have the best pitching and probably the best offense in the division.

 

This seems unlikely. Cairo projections look better than BPro ones but I don't see how the Cubs will be the best offense and defense.

[Derwood]

 

Because we're going to have the best pitching and probably the best offense in the division.

 

This seems unlikely. Cairo projections look better than BPro ones but I don't see how the Cubs will be the best offense and defense.

 

whose offense and pitching will be better?

[TruffleShuffle]

 

Because we're going to have the best pitching and probably the best offense in the division.

 

This seems unlikely. Cairo projections look better than BPro ones but I don't see how the Cubs will be the best offense and defense.

 

whose offense and pitching will be better?

 

the cardinals are likely to have a better offense than us; the brewers scored nearly half a run more per game than us last year and i don't think it's a huge deal that they've lost jason kendall, felipe lopez, mike cameron, jj hardy and bill hall. i guess the reds might be close if some of their young guys continue to improve (likely) and dusty doesn't give unproductive players 500 PAs (unlikely).

 

as for pitching, i'd definitely take the cardinals' staff over the cubs and the reds will probably be close.

[Backtobanks]

With everything neutral, I would think the Cubs would be co-favorites with the Cards for the division. If most things go right (rebounds by Soto, Soriano, Fontenot, Marmol, etc. and health for Aram and Soriano) the Cubs are better, but if most things go wrong like last year (a ton of injuries to key players and off years from others) the Cards are better. I was amazed that Tim Dierkes from MLBTR thought that the Cub injuries in 2009 weren't out of the ordinary. I agree that the Mets' injuries were extraordinary, but the Cubs had their best hitter out for half a season, their power-hitting left fielder playing on one leg (and their reserve OF out with a broken leg), their catcher out for weeks, and two of their starting pitchers out for quite awhile. I wonder what the Cards' record would have been with Pujols out for half a season, Holliday playing on one leg, Carpenter and Wainwright missing multiple starts, and Molina missing a few weeks.

[Deder]

whose offense and pitching will be better?

 

This question is really too hard to answer because we don't know who will get hurt etc yet. However if I answer the question of whose offense and pitching could be better than the Cubs I have multiple choices for each one. I can easily envision a world where the Cubs have the 4th best offense in the division. Soriano doesn't bounce back, Aramis has more injury issues, Lee doesn't have his huge surge like last year, Soto's weight loss isn't the magic answer etc. There are plenty of areas of worry on this offense and not many sure things at this point.

 

I can easily envision a world where the Cubs have the 3rd best pitching in the division if Lilly doesn't come back strong and Zambrano continues to have injury issues. I don't really trust Wells yet and having all three of Gorzelanny, Samardzija and Silva getting a lot of starts is not a good thing. The bullpen doesn't look too terribly strong either but bullpens are so random year to year it is just hard to say. I mean worse case scenario here they could actually have the 4th or 5th best if both Lilly and Z go down for any length of time, that of course is just the nature of pitching. Even if everything bounces their way it probably takes wainwright or carpenter getting hurt to beat out the Cards pitching.

 

Now I'm not saying the Cubs have the 4th best offense/pitching in the division. I'm saying that they aren't anywhere close to obvious #1. I'm just saying as the roster is constructed right now I think it probably isn't fair to expect the best offense AND best pitching in the division from this team. A number of things have to go the Cubs way for that to happen.

[MSG T]

OK - looks like BP worked out the early kinks (and RS/RA issues), but it still looks bleak.

 

NL Central

St. Louis Cardinals 86 - 76 ; 745/702

Cincinnati Reds 81 - 81 ; 726 /730

Chicago Cubs 77 - 85 ; 725/768

Milwaukee Brewers 77 - 85 ; 766/805

Houston Astros 74 - 88 ; 714/779

Pittsburgh Pirates 68 - 94 ; 704/813

 

Ahh, good, Houston didn't secede from the central.

[Lefty]

I'd put a lot of money on us being better than the Reds.

 

You'd lose.

[jersey cubs fan]

okay - like I thought, these projections mean little to nothing except for the people that want to believe we'll suck this year.

What exactly is it that would cause you to believe anything other than that we will be a mediocre team?

 

Because we're going to have the best pitching and probably the best offense in the division.

 

What? I doubt this. The Cubs had the best offense once this decade, and usually there's been at least 2 better offenses in the division. The odds are they won't have the best of either this year, let alone the best pitching and hitting.

[Guancous]

okay - like I thought, these projections mean little to nothing except for the people that want to believe we'll suck this year.

What exactly is it that would cause you to believe anything other than that we will be a mediocre team?

 

Because we're going to have the best pitching and probably the best offense in the division.

 

What? I doubt this. The Cubs had the best offense once this decade, and usually there's been at least 2 better offenses in the division. The odds are they won't have the best of either this year, let alone the best pitching and hitting.

 

The Cubs certainly have a chance to make the playoffs if everything bounces their way. Then again, this team is currently worse than the 2004 and 2009 squads that missed the playoffs.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I'd put a lot of money on us being better than the Reds.

 

You'd lose.

 

 

Really? I'm going to use OPS+ and ERA+ because it'll be quick. Average of the last two years.

 

Cubs                   Reds


C   SOTO          96   86  HERNANDEZ
1B  LEE          126  140  VOTTO            
2B  FONTENOT     100   98  PHILLIPS    
SS  THERIOT       88   85  CABRERA  
3B  RAMIREZ      128  112  ROLEN
LF  SORIANO      101   98  NIX          
CF  BYRD         113   99  STUBBS
RF  FUKUDOME      96   99  BRUCE

SP  ZAMBRANO     118  102  ARROYO
SP  DEMPSTER     139  118  VOLQUEZ
SP  LILLY        128   97  HARANG
SP  WELLS        123   94  CUETO
SP  GORZELANNY    72   76  BAILEY

 

And we have the better pen. They simply do not have the pitching unless like 7 things go right simultaneously.

[Outshined_One]

And we have the better pen. They simply do not have the pitching unless like 7 things go right simultaneously.

 

Not to mention that most of those 7 things involve the health of a pitching staff overseen by Dusty Baker.

[Garwilly]

I'd put a lot of money on us being better than the Reds.

 

You'd lose.

 

Put your money where your mouth is.

[chasinf5s]

okay - like I thought, these projections mean little to nothing except for the people that want to believe we'll suck this year.

What exactly is it that would cause you to believe anything other than that we will be a mediocre team?

 

Because we're going to have the best pitching and probably the best offense in the division.

 

What? I doubt this. The Cubs had the best offense once this decade, and usually there's been at least 2 better offenses in the division. The odds are they won't have the best of either this year, let alone the best pitching and hitting.

 

The Cubs certainly have a chance to make the playoffs if everything bounces their way. Then again, this team is currently worse than the 2004 and 2009 squads that missed the playoffs.

 

The past is the past. Sure its easy to say they are worse but then its easy to say the 2003-2004-2007 and 2008 cubs were better than the World Series winning Cards of 2006.

[chasinf5s]

I'd put a lot of money on us being better than the Reds.

 

You'd lose.

 

As a team the reds hit 8 points lower and had a OBP 14 points lower than the Cubs. The reds OPS was also well below the Cubs.

 

The cubs also had better stats compared to the reds pitching.

 

I just dont see the reds being as good as the Cubs, if only because Baker is their manager and he does not have a roided up player to make him look good....

[Lefty]

I'd put a lot of money on us being better than the Reds.

 

You'd lose.

 

Put your money where your mouth is.

 

How?

[Lefty]

I'd put a lot of money on us being better than the Reds.

 

You'd lose.

 

As a team the reds hit 8 points lower and had a OBP 14 points lower than the Cubs. The reds OPS was also well below the Cubs.

 

The cubs also had better stats compared to the reds pitching.

 

I just dont see the reds being as good as the Cubs, if only because Baker is their manager and he does not have a roided up player to make him look good....

 

Those are last year's stats. By that measure the Cubs must have won the division in 2009 because of their 2008 stats.

 

The Cubs are on their way down, the Reds on their way up. They cross this year.

[Derwood]

I'd put a lot of money on us being better than the Reds.

 

You'd lose.

 

As a team the reds hit 8 points lower and had a OBP 14 points lower than the Cubs. The reds OPS was also well below the Cubs.

 

The cubs also had better stats compared to the reds pitching.

 

I just dont see the reds being as good as the Cubs, if only because Baker is their manager and he does not have a roided up player to make him look good....

 

Those are last year's stats. By that measure the Cubs must have won the division in 2009 because of their 2008 stats.

 

The Cubs are on their way down, the Reds on their way up. They cross this year.

 

You see no rebound from Soto or Soriano? You expect Ramirez to be hurt again? You don't think Byrd can outperform Bradley?

 

On the flip side, you're expecting who to step up for the Reds? Bruce? An 80 year old Scott Rolen?

 

I just don't see it

[scarey]

There is still plenty of projection tweaks between now and Opening Day. That said:

 

* Soto is not a 100% lock to return to 2008 levels.

* Lee is a year older and coming off a flukish power year.

* 2nd base is far from settled.

* We're counting on a slightly above average Theriot and rookies at SS.

* Aramis remains injury-prone and his shoulder could dislocate on another dive.

* Marlon Byrd's bat could regress.

* Soriano's collapse could continue

* Nady's elbow may not be right all year.

* Kosuke could become more of a whirling dervish.

* Lilly's return gets pushed back past May 1st.

* Randy Wells regresses to the league average.

* Dempster regresses a bit.

* Zambrano's elbow/shoulder finally gives out from abuse.

* None of the young minor league arms step up.

* Marmol walks too many guys.

 

None of these possibilities are that far-fetched. Could the Cubs win 95 games? Sure. But none of these will happen and the Cubs would need the Rookie of the Year.

 

I'll be happy with .500 this year, notwithstanding a solid trade. Then again, I was pessimistic in 2008 and optimistic in 2009.

 

 

Well, don't forget that Santo could fall out of the booth and die on impact, President Obama could attend a game and eat a tainted hotdog causing fatal food poisoning, and the sky could fall. Other than those exemptions, I think you have a great outlook on the upcoming season...

[Guancous]

There is still plenty of projection tweaks between now and Opening Day. That said:

 

* Soto is not a 100% lock to return to 2008 levels.

* Lee is a year older and coming off a flukish power year.

* 2nd base is far from settled.

* We're counting on a slightly above average Theriot and rookies at SS.

* Aramis remains injury-prone and his shoulder could dislocate on another dive.

* Marlon Byrd's bat could regress.

* Soriano's collapse could continue

* Nady's elbow may not be right all year.

* Kosuke could become more of a whirling dervish.

* Lilly's return gets pushed back past May 1st.

* Randy Wells regresses to the league average.

* Dempster regresses a bit.

* Zambrano's elbow/shoulder finally gives out from abuse.

* None of the young minor league arms step up.

* Marmol walks too many guys.

 

None of these possibilities are that far-fetched. Could the Cubs win 95 games? Sure. But none of these will happen and the Cubs would need the Rookie of the Year.

 

I'll be happy with .500 this year, notwithstanding a solid trade. Then again, I was pessimistic in 2008 and optimistic in 2009.

 

 

Well, don't forget that Santo could fall out of the booth and die on impact, President Obama could attend a game and eat a tainted hotdog causing fatal food poisoning, and the sky could fall. Other than those exemptions, I think you have a great outlook on the upcoming season...

 

I'm not saying the Cubs will go 59-103. That list shows they're far from a lock for 95 wins and a playoff berth.