NL Central showdown: Position rankings

This is kinda sad truth about 2012. Cubs.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/p
ost/_/id/20589/nl-central-showdown-
position-rankings



Final tally
1. Brewers, 77 points
2. Reds, 73 points
3. Cardinals, 68 points
4. Pirates, 46 points
5. Cubs, 39 points
6. Astros, 33 points


Hopefully some young talent will emerge or else this will be another typical Cub season...

Barely ahead of a Houston team that won 56 games last year.

And everyone thinks I'm crazy calling this a 60 win team.

are these writer David Schoenfield rankings ???


curious to see what he had for last year ranking

It looks like the 2011 standings.  It looks pretty fair to me.  The Cubs could get some unexpected career years out of some of their cheap signings/trades but that is not very likely.  

It is as I expected barely over a replacement squad and it they do better it will be due to the managment and coaching staff getting the most out of re-tools vs a talented team. 

Boyd, I have seen many posters here say the Cubs are a 60-65 win team this year. But "everyone" thinks.....

And everyone thinks I'm crazy calling this a 60 win team.

what the hell are you talking about?...everyone thinks this is a 60ish win team. Its the remnants of your boyfreinds brilliance so if they get 70 i'll be surprised. 

I don't agree at all with most of these rankings.  I don't think the Cubs are going to do that well next year but man these are rough.  My big disagreements as it relates to the Cubs.


1.  Soriano being way, way too low.

2.  Byrd to low as well.

3.  Matt Garza way low.

4.  Dempster too low (even after his terrible season last year).

5.  Marmol too low.

6.  Cubs bullpen too low. 


Anyone who disagrees with me feel free to discuss.  Outside of the Cubs on this list the big one that stands out to me is Carpenter.  At this stage of his career he is not the same pitcher he use to be.  I can think of 5 pitchers in the Central I would easily take over him.                 

Barely ahead of a Houston team that won 56 games last year.

And everyone thinks I'm crazy calling this a 60 win team.

Well, that IS exactly where we finished last year, just ahead of Houston, and looking up at the rest of the division, but I have not seen anyone call you "crazy" for calling this a 60 win team, and actually I have seen many agree with you. I tend to think 68 with a + or - of 5 games is their range, so 63 to 73 wins depending on how some guys play and develop. 

The places where many of us chose to disagree with you are the impact one high priced FA would have made, and the value of having the 8 to 10 more wins they would produce. The days of needing to go from 70 to 80 to 90 wins are over. Teams go from worst to first these days.

There was just not enough quality pitching this year to fix the Cubs biggest hole, SP. Next year the Cubs should have enough payroll flexibility to make a run at both Cain and Hamels, and that alone would take us from doormats to challengers for the division. Cain, Hamels, and Garza are as good a top 3 as any in the league. Theo has said that starting pitching is the Cubs biggest weakness, and anyone watching the team last year would agree, so it kinda makes sense to save alot of payroll for next year when the best class of FA SP's ever will be available doesn't it?

I don't agree at all with most of these rankings.  I don't think the Cubs are going to do that well next year but man these are rough.  My big disagreements as it relates to the Cubs.


1.  Soriano being way, way too low.

2.  Byrd to low as well.

3.  Matt Garza way low.

4.  Dempster too low (even after his terrible season last year).

5.  Marmol too low.

6.  Cubs bullpen too low. 


Anyone who disagrees with me feel free to discuss.  Outside of the Cubs on this list the big one that stands out to me is Carpenter.  At this stage of his career he is not the same pitcher he use to be.  I can think of 5 pitchers in the Central I would easily take over him.                 

Soriano is properly ranked on this list, there is not one guy above him that I would not take as my starter over Alfonso.

I thought Byrd could have been a little higher, I think he is being downgraded because he was hurt most of last year. I would probably have him third behind McCutchen and Jon Jay. To have a guy that struck out 205 times last year ranked 2nd is laughable. When does the hype on Stubbs stop?

If you read what he said about Garza and the rest of the number ones, you see he had all four of the top guys rated about evenly, and I would agree with that, but Carpenter is probably getting some bump from reputation.

I agree on Dempster, and I expect a better season from him this year, although it will not show in win and losses because the Cubs will struggle to score runs.

The Marmol that pitched last year is properly ranked, if he gets back to 2008-09 form he would be #1 or #2 on this list, but be careful what you wish for here. If he pitches well in the first half of the season, he will almost certainly be moved to a contender before the trade deadline.

The bullpen looks about right, but could be better depending on how some of our young arms develop.

I don't agree at all with most of these rankings.  I don't think the Cubs are going to do that well next year but man these are rough.  My big disagreements as it relates to the Cubs.


1.  Soriano being way, way too low.

2.  Byrd to low as well.

3.  Matt Garza way low.

4.  Dempster too low (even after his terrible season last year).

5.  Marmol too low.

6.  Cubs bullpen too low. 

another silly fanboy comes forward. You know there IS a reason the Cubs were the second worst team in the league last year and its mainly bad players.

1) it isnt even possible to rank Soriano too low.

2) ehhh...Byrd's ok...nothing special.

3) maybe ...garza is a good pitcher

4) no chance..Dempster is mediocre and  paid as if he were a star.

5) he hasnt proven it yet

6) seriously?  

I bet that Theo Epstein has more wins in his 5 years then Jim Hendry did in his 8-1/2 years.I'm predicting 79-83 record in 2012.

your dreamin' Cena.....not with all the left over crap.  

1) it isnt even possible to rank Soriano too low.

2) ehhh...Byrd's ok...nothing special.

3) maybe ...garza is a good pitcher

4) no chance..Dempster is mediocre and  paid as if he were a star.

5) he hasnt proven it yet

6) seriously? 

1. I forgot how many LF's were in the Central that had some pop.  Oh yeah three (Soriano, Holliday, Braun).  Having him at sixth is just using Soriano as a scapegoat for all thing wrong with the Cubs.

2. On some boards on the MLB Network's top 10 CF's in the league  they had Byrd as 9th.  So your telling me the NL Centrals all star cast has Byrd as the 5th best in the NL?

3. Garza, Latos, Gallarado, Greinke and Marcum are all better pitchers than Carpenter at this stage of his career.

4.  I disagree about Dempster.

5.  Monte over Marmol, definently not.

6. I rate the Cubs higher.

another silly fanboy comes forward. You know there IS a reason the Cubs were the second worst team in the league last year and its mainly bad players.

I disagree, it was poor coaching.

                 

So your telling me the NL Centrals all star cast has Byrd as the 5th best in the NL?

NL Central =

Well, that IS exactly where we finished last year, just ahead of Houston

Wrong.

Last year the Cubs finished 15 games ahead of Houston.

That is a lot more than just ahead.

There was just not enough quality pitching this year to fix the Cubs biggest hole, SP

Sure there was.

It just isnt Travis Wood, Chris Volstad or Paul Maholm.

You keep Zambrano and sign one quality guy and that gives you a pretty good top 4.

Next year the Cubs should have enough payroll flexibility to make a run at both Cain and Hamels, and that alone would take us from doormats to challengers for the division

Only if the pitch 20 shutouts combined.

There still wont be enough offense on the team to compete.

Somehow having Prince Fielder in the lineup for 160 games wouldn't make a difference, but Cain and Hamels starting 70 games will make a bigger difference?

And 5 or 6 year big money deals on SP is WAY riskier than a 9 or 10 year deal for Fielder.

One major arm injury and your done.

so it kinda makes sense to save alot of payroll for next year when the best class of FA SP's ever will be available doesn't it?

Just like it made sense to save money 2 years ago to get either Pujols, Fielder or Gonzalez at 1B right??

Gonzalez never even made it to free agency.

And the list of elite SP that are FA after this season now will be no where close to what it will be when next offseason rolls around.

Several of those pitchers will be resigned by their current teams.

So what looks like the 'best class of FA SP's ever' (doubtful) right now, probably wont look near as good when it comes and when the field get thinned out the Yankees will still have the most money and a need for SP so they will get who they want.

not with all the left over crap.

New starting RF.

New starting 3B

New starting 1B.

Possible new starting 2B.

Three new SP.

More accurately should be stated not with all the new crap brought in.

Considering Soriano, most people are looking at him through his contract and not his (diminishing) skill, but if you're comparing their on-field performances Soriano could definitely be ranked a bit higher on that list.

His contract is bad, but it's not like his $$$ are on the field playing, it's his glove and bat.

And the list of elite SP that are FA after this season now will be no where close to what it will be when next offseason rolls around.

Cain, Hamels, and Grienke will all hit the open market. Those three are all elite.

Several of those pitchers will be resigned by their current teams.

So what looks like the 'best class of FA SP's ever' (doubtful) right now, probably wont look near as good when it comes and when the field get thinned out the Yankees will still have the most money and a need for SP so they will get who they want.

Like I said, Cain, Hamels and Grienke will all hit the open market. Those three alone make it the best FA class ever. The list of available players will likely shrink some, but there will certainly be sopme quality behind these three as well.

Sure there was.

It just isnt Travis Wood, Chris Volstad or Paul Maholm.

You keep Zambrano and sign one quality guy and that gives you a pretty good top 4.

I said quality, not a hothead with a diminishing arm. Zambrano was certainly done in Chicago, and my guess is he is about done in baseball, we can agree to disagree on this one. What qualty guy did you want to sign, CJ Wilson...not worth the contract he got, Burhle...ehh, who else????

Somehow having Prince Fielder in the lineup for 160 games wouldn't make a difference, but Cain and Hamels starting 70 games will make a bigger difference?

I never said we would not have to improve our lineup, and I believe we will. We can see how our guys do this year, and add bat or two as well as the elite pitching we desperately need. I think the Cubs would have loved to have Fielder, just not at 10 years and 250 million, and that is realistically what it would have taken.

It is importasnt to remember that you believe absolutely nothing good is going to happen this year, and I believe at least 1 or 2 of our position prospects will become at least solid major league ballplayers. 

When it comes to prospects your are as bad as the guys that believe every prospect will become Babe Ruth in that you think they are all going to be busts. I tend to take a stance somewhere in between the two extremes.

Just like it made sense to save money 2 years ago to get either Pujols, Fielder or Gonzalez at 1B right??

It was only the fans that were saying this was our strategy. Realistically Pujols was never coming here, and Fielder might have, but we would have had to way overpay in money and years to get him. I am sure the Cubs would have liked to have both of those guys, it just ended up that they were priced out of the market.

Cain, Hamels, and Grienke will all hit the open market. Those three are all elite.



I still don't get what makes Grienke "elite". He had his Cy Young year which was excellent. He had a decent W/L record last year but his ERA was heavily influenced by a good September and he flat out sucked in the playoffs. If those are your 3 choices...Greinke would be last on that list and a pretty heavy drop off after the first 2. I certainly wouldn't want him as a #1 on the Cubs - they can do better than that.

I read that the Giants have the money and arent going to let Cain walk. I mean I know anything can happen, but it seemed like the Giants are not going to let him leave unless its for a huge price.