Getty Images

Throughout the season the CBS Sports MLB experts will bring you a weekly Batting Around roundtable breaking down pretty much anything. The latest news, a historical question, thoughts about the future of baseball, all sorts of stuff. Last week we discussed the Athletics name when they move to Las Vegas. This week we're going to tackle underperforming teams.

Which team has been the bigger disappointment: Mets or Padres?

R.J. Anderson: I'm going with the Mets. I know neither has the kind of record we expected them to have, but the Mets also have a negative run differential. The Padres, to their credit, are well into plus territory in that respect, and as I write this, are about 50 runs better on the season than the Mets. On a related note, the Padres also have the better record.

Dayn Perry: While the Cardinals might like a word, I have to go with the Mets if given the choice between them or the Padres. The Pads compared to the Mets have a slightly better record and a significantly better run differential, and they've achieved those things despite playing a tougher schedule thus far. Given that the Mets won 100 games last season and are running the highest payroll in MLB history, they're the "winners" here.

Matt Snyder: I think if you took the temperature of the fan bases, the Mets would probably "win" here in convincing fashion, but for me personally, it's the Padres. I predicted the Mets to finish third in the NL East and miss the playoffs. Some of the issues that concerned me were the possibility of a fragile pitching staff -- some due to age -- and relatively thin lineup. That is to say, I thought we could foresee some of the issues that have plagued the Mets. On the Padres' end, the pathetic offense, especially situationally, just shouldn't be happening. They should be better than this. They lead the NL in ERA. If someone told you heading into the season that as of June 29, the Padres would have the best team ERA in the NL, surely you'd think the Padres would be in first place. Instead, the bats have totally failed them. Manny Machado, Jake Cronenworth and Xander Bogaerts in particular need to be much better.

Mike Axisa: I think it's the Padres as well. The Mets have the biggest payroll in baseball history, but coming into the season, it was pretty clear how this team could underperform. They banked on several aging pitchers and they didn't add to a lineup that was good last season, though not great. Injuries happened, Max Scherzer and Justin Verlander have shown their age at times, and the lineup is again a bat or two short. Also, the middle of the bullpen is weak. This isn't that shocking, is it?

With the Padres though, everyone in their core is in their prime except Yu Darvish, yet just about all of them are underperforming. I mean, it's June 29 and Manny Machado is hitting .253/.297/.410. Xander Bogaerts has hit .228/.304/.315 since May 1. Jake Cronenworth has been one of the least productive first basemen in baseball. A lot of their guys should be better than this. The Mets are having more of a worst-case scenario kind of season. This was always within the range of possibilities. The Padres are just confounding. There's no reason they should be this mediocre.