Mike Mussina

I know my last post said that I would only be making one more post and it would be to announce a new project I'm working on, but I guess I lied. This post has nothing to do with my project, which I will still be announcing some time in March.

The reason for this post is that Alex Belth of Bronx Banter is doing a preview week for the Yankees and he asked me to write an article for him. The article I wrote is about Mike Mussina and is on his web site right now.

I don't know if it's ironic or just funny, but after everything I wrote on this blog, my first Clutch Hit comes on the first thing I write for another blog. Anyway, thanks Repoz.

30,000 and done

I just recently reached the 30,000 mark for visitors to this blog. When I started the blog back in mid-April last year, I didn't know exactly what to expect from it. I have to say that I've throughly enjoyed writing this blog and I hope you've enjoyed reading it.

As you may have noticed, however, I haven't been making very many posts since November. In fact, the main purpose of this post is to inform all of you that it's my second-to-last post on this blog.

The reason I'm quitting the blog is because I'm starting an exciting, new project that will take up most of my free time. My last post on this blog will come some time in March, probably early in the month, when that project is ready to be announced.

If you're interested in finding out what I'm going to be doing that will prevent me from blogging, check back in March to find out. If you don't particularly care, I thank you for all the times you've visited so far and I hope my writing was interesting, informative and enjoyable. Or at the very least, one of the three.

I'm back

First of all, I'd like to apologize for my several long absences from posting this winter. It has been due to a combination of a decrease in baseball news and an increase in my laziness, as well as some other things I've had to spend time on in the past couple months. At any rate, if you've continued to check this blog regularly (or even semi-regularly), I very much appreciate it.

Many of you probably have it as well, but one of the things I got for Christmas this year was the 2004 Bill James Handbook (which you probably know is just the new name for what used to be the STATS Major League Handbook). Like I said, I got it for Christmas, but I've just recently gotten a chance to look through it. As you know if you have a copy (or if you ever got the STATS version in the past), there's a lot of interesting stuff in there.

The thing that interested me most, at least yesterday and today, is something that wasn't in the old STATS books -- the manager's record. Throughout the year, most fans get annoyed by certain things their team's manager seems to do a lot, but you never really know how much they're doing that particular thing. Well, now you can find out, and I think that's a great thing.

The manager's record provides statistics for each manager in several categories -- lineups used, platoon percentage, pinch hitters used, pinch runners used, defensive substitutes, relief pitchers used, long outings, stolen base attempts, sacrifice attempts, intentional walks and pitch outs. Most of those categories are pretty self-explanatory, but two aren't. Platoon Percentage indicates how much of the time the hitter in a manager's starting lineup had the platoon edge on the opposing starting pitcher, and Long Outings are any outings by a starting pitcher of more than 120 pitches.

The book just has each manager listed alphabetically, so I went through and entered everything from last season into a spreadsheet so that I could see where the managers and teams (since some things are more dependant on the team than the manager) ranked in each category. Now, I'm going to share the things that I found interesting with you.

For lineups used and platoon percentage, I was only able to list 28 teams because Florida and Cincinnati both had multiple managers and it would have been difficult for me to figure out their numbers in those categories. Anyway, of the other 28 teams, only six teams used fewer than 125 different lineups an all six teams won more than 85 games (average of 94 wins). Bobby Cox's Atlanta Braves used 98 different lineups, the only team with fewer than 100.

On the other hand, seven teams used more than 150 different lineups and none of the seven won more than 86 games (average of 77.6 wins). This isn't to say that using more lineups causes a team to win fewer games, as Felipe Alou used exactly 150 different lineups and his team won 100 games. If there is a strong correlation throughout history between using fewer lineups and winning more games, it's probably because the teams that use fewer lineups have better players and fewer injuries, so there's less need to change the lineups.

Only four teams out fo the 28 had a platoon percentage below .50 -- the Chicago Cubs, Colorado Rockies, Milwaukee Brewers and Houston Astros. Four teams had the platoon advantage more than 65-percent of the time -- the Detroit Tigers, Cleveland Indians, Arizona Diamondbacks and New York Yankees. The Tigers had the platoon advantage 72-percent of the time, but won just 62.5-percent of their games, so I guess having the platoon advantage doesn't always help.

The average team used 190.7 pinch-hitters. Not surprisingly, every NL team was above average (San Francisco was closest to average with 195 pinch-hitters) and every AL team was below average (Tampa Bay was closest to average with 159).

Coincidentally, seven NL teams used fewer than 270 pinch-hitters and those teams averaged 90.6 wins (with a low of 83 in Montreal) and won 14 more games than their Pythagorean records. The other nine NL teams averaged 74.7 wins (with a high of 87 in Houston) and won 10 fewer games than their Pythagorean records. As I said, I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

If you, like me, are a Red Sox fan, than you probably thought he pinch-ran for hit hitters more than anybody in the history of baseball. Well, it wasn't that severe, but he did use 62 pinch-runners, which was the most in baseball. Only four other managers used more than 40 pinch-runners. As far as I can tell, only four active managers have ever used more pinch-runners in a season than Little used this year. Bobby Cox used 72 pinch-runners in 2000, Art Howe used 74 in 1996 and 81 in 2000, Lou Piniella used 96 in 2002 and Joe Torre used 70 in 1997.

Jerry Manuel used 67 defensive substitutes to tie for the most in baseball with Art Howe. No other AL manager used more than 40 defensive subs and Florida, with 17, was the only NL team to use fewer than 25 defensive subs. The average team used 33.8 defensive subs.

Only one AL manager was in the top 10 in relief pitchers used -- Buck Showalter was third with 494. When your starting pitchers post a 6.24 ERA and can only manage 5.14 innings per start, that leaves a lot of innings for the bullpen to pitch. Texas had a 4.88 ERA from its bullpen, which was 29th in the majors, but that's not quite so bad when you consider that the Rangers bullpen was called on to pitch 601 innings. That's 205 innings more than the Yankees needed from their bullpen, which is essentially an extra starting rotation spot that the Rangers had to fill with relievers.

The average team used 431.9 relief pitchers, and Florida was the only NL team to use fewer than 400 despite the fact that Jeff Torborg used 115 relievers in the 38 games he managed (3.03 per game). Jack McKeon made up for that by using just 2.26 relievers per game, by far the fewest in the NL. Art Howe was next among NL managers with 2.56 relief pitchers used per game.

The average team allowed 6.2 long outings by its starting pitchers, but only 10 teams allowed more than six long outings. Three teams had more than twice as many long outings as the average team and two teams had more than four times as many long outings as the average team. It shouldn't be a surprise to anybody that that team is the Chicago Cubs.

Dusty Baker rode his starting pitchers for 28 long outings in the regular season and two more in the postseason. Kerry Wood made 13 long outings (plus one more in the playoffs), including a 141-pitch outing and a 130-pitch outing. Mark Prior had nine long outings (plus one more in the playoffs), including three starts with more than 130 pitches. Carlos Zambrano had five long outings and Matt Clement had one long outing.

That didn't surprise me at all, but I was surprised that Frank Robinson allowed the second-most long outings with 27. Javier Vazquez and Livan Hernandez each had 13 long outings, including two outings for each with at least 130 pitches, and Zach Day had one long outing.

(Doing the last three paragraphs on long outings, I just realized that either the Bill James Handbook or ESPN.com isn't entirely accurate. The Handbook says Baker had 26 long outings and Robinson had 23 long outings, but I checked and double-checked the game logs for all the starting pitchers on both teams and came up with 28 for Baker and 27 for Robinson. Hopefully, there aren't that many inaccuracies.)

If you like the National League better than the American League because it's more interesting with its extra bunting and base stealing, you'll be disappointed about the following news. The average team had 123.5 stolen base attempts, but nine of the 12 teams that were above that average were AL teams. Florida obviously led the majors (with 224 attempts), but the other six teams with at least 140 attempts all resided in the AL. Of the 10 teams with fewer than 105 stolen base attempts, seven were in the NL.

The Marlins attempted nearly two steals per game under Jeff Torborg (74 attempts in 38 games). The only other manager whose team attempted more than one steal per game was the other manager of the Marlins, Jack McKeon, with 150 attempts in 124 games. While the Marlins had an edge of 30 in attempts, they only had an edge of eight in successful steals. Florida stole 150 bases at a 67-percent success rate while Tampa Bay stole 142 bases at a 77.2-percent success rate.

Of course, just because more AL teams are trying to steal a lot then NL teams, that doesn't mean that all AL teams are. Only two teams attempted fewer than 90 steals -- Toronto and Oakland with 62 each. Despite not trying very often, Oakland was very proficient with 48 steals for a 77.4-percent success rate. Toronto stole 37 bases for an awful 59.7-percent success rate.

Tony LaRussa called for nearly 100 more sacrifice bunts than Carlos Tosca did. The Cardinals attempted to sacrifice 111 times while the Blue Jays attempted just 13 sacrifices. The only AL manager who was in teh top 15 in sacrifice attempts was Alan Trammell, who was ninth with 94.

Speaking of Tony LaRussa, he issued five intentional walks in one game against the Boston Red Sox. In the other 161 games combined, he issued just 31 intentional walks. The top two teams in intentional walks both resided in the NL East. Art Howe issued 71 intentional walks and Bobby Cox issued 69.

Ten teams issued at least 50 intentional walks and, not surprisingly, three of them were in the NL West, home of the man who was intentionally walked 61 times. Bruce Bochy issued 52 intentional walks total, 10 of them to Barry Bonds. Bob Brenly also issued 52 intentional walks, nine of them to Bonds. Clint Hurdle issued 51 intentional walks, but only three were to Bonds. Jim Tracy intentionally walked Bonds seven times, but only issued 35 IBBs total. In all, the non-San Francisco NL West issued 190 intentional walks with 29 of them (15.3-percent) going to Bonds.

Well, that's all I've got for today. I hope you enjoyed this little trip through the 2003 major league managers. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go get some stakes, garlic and silver bullets so I can hunt down and kill the Vampire Trade Rumor.

So long, Mo

First, I'd like to apologize for my absence the past couple days. I've been very busy and unable to sit down and get a post written. Today, I still don't have any real outstanding analysis or anything, but I'd like to talk about something that is not much of a surprise at all. According to WFAN, Mo Vaughn is not retiring, but he will not be able to play at all in 2004 and he probably won't be able to play baseball again.

In recent years, Vaughn's career has turned into a joke, but I'm very appreciative of what Vaughn did for the Boston Red Sox. The Red Sox took Vaughn in the first round of the 1989 draft, and he made his major-league debut two years later.

Vaughn's first two seasons in the big leagues were not good as he hit .244/.331/.389 (.719) with 17 homers, 63 runs and 89 RBI in 187 games. Then, in 1993, he turned into the hitter who would anchor the Boston lineup for the next six years. He played 152 games and hit .297/.390/.525 (.915) with 29 homers, 86 runs and 101 RBI.

From 1995 through 1998, he was one of the most feared hitters in the American League, playing at least 140 games each season while posting an OPS+ of at least 145 each year. In those four seasons, he made the All-Star game three times, he finished in the top five in MVP voting three times, he finished in the top 10 in batting three times, he finished in the top six in OBP three times, he finished in the top 10 in SLG four times, he finished in the top 10 in OPS four times, he finished in the top 10 in runs twice, he finished in the top four in hits twice, he finished in the top five in total bases three times, he finished in the top 10 in homers four times, he finished in the top three in RBI twice, he finished in the top 10 in walks twice, he finished in the top 10 in extra-base hits three times, he finished in the top eight in times on base three times and he finished in the top 10 in OPS+ four times.

If you didn't feel like reading through that whole list, let me summarize it for you. From 1995 through 1998, Mo Vaughn was one of the best hitters in the American League. And he played for my favorite team. And I loved it.

He was this big, huge, intimidating guy, but he was as friendly as could be. My dad liked to call him a big teddy bear, but he was a teddy bear who could crush a baseball.

I remember being awed by the fact that Vaughn could contend for a batting title with that swing of his. That uppercut swing that spent so little time in the strike zone that it required perfect timing looked like a sure recipe for a low average and lots of strikeouts. Vaughn did strike out a lot, but he was able to hit .315 from 1993 through 1998.

I remember Vaughn leading the Red Sox to the playoffs for the first time in 1995, and then going hitless as Boston was swept in three games by the Cleveland Indians. And I remember three years later when Vaughn got his next chance in the playoffs, against that same Indians team, and smacked two home runs and drove in seven runs.

I remember the Opening Day walkoff home run that is alluded to on Vaughn's Baseball-Reference page.

I remember a lot of times when Vaughn made me a very happy Red Sox fan, and I'm truly appreciative of everything he did for the franchise over those six seasons.

I was sad to see Vaughn leave Boston after 1998. Even though I knew it would have been foolish for Boston to give him a contract similar to the one that Anaheim gave him, I was sad to see him go. And I'm sad that his career took such a turn for the worse, and that it now appears to be over.

He was a very, very good player over a six-year stretch with my favorite team. I hope his career is remembered for that and not for the fat jokes that dominated the end of his career.

Perfect he's not

Boomer on breaking his word

Last off-season, David Wells reached a verbal agreement to sign a one-year deal with the Arizona Diamondbacks, where he would have filled the third spot in the rotation behind Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling. Instead of pitching for Arizona, however, he ended up helping the Yankees reach the World Series (and then he helped them lose the World Series by pitching just one inning in game five).

This off-season, Wells reached a verbal agreement to accept a minor-league contract with the Yankees that most likely would have turned into a major-league contract and a spot, part-time at least, in the rotation. Instead of pitching for New York, however, he will end up being the "ace" of the San Diego Padres rotation after signing a one-year deal that could be worth as much as $7-million with incentives.

Just as Wells' change of heart last year left Arizona with a dearth of starting pitchers, so will his change of heart this year leave New York with a dearth of starting pitchers, at least compared to what the Yankees are accustomed to having.

Last year, if you'll remember, one of the biggest stories heading into the season was how much depth the Yankees had in their starting rotation. Even after trading the broken Duke, Orlando Hernandez, to Montreal, the Yankees five-man rotation had seven applicants: Mike Mussina, Andy Pettitte, Roger Clemens, David Wells, Jose Contreras, Jeff Weaver and Sterling Hitchcock.

The first four each made at least 30 starts and pitched anywhere from above average (Wells) to great (Mussina). Weaver got 24 starts and was ineffective to say the least. Injuries limited Contreras to nine starts and 71 innings (he also made nine relief appearances) and Hitchcock got just one start in his 27 appearances before being traded to St. Louis in August.

And now only two of those pitchers remain: Mussina and Contreras. Three new pitchers have been added: Javier Vazquez, Kevin Brown and Jon Lieber. Most teams would kill to have a rotation of Mussina, Vazquez, Brown, Contreras and Lieber, but the Yankees are not most teams.

The Yankees can afford to buy insurance policies, but at the moment they don't have any insurance on this rotation. And it is a rotation that could use insurance.

Mussina is as solid as they come. He has pitched at least 200 innings in each of the last nine seasons and he was just one-third of an inning from reaching 215 innings for the seventh time in nine years last season. He's very economical, meaning that his high inning totals do not come with outrageously high pitch totals. Other than the risk of a fluke injury that follows every player, Mussnia is not a risk to miss time.

Vazquez has been just as durable, pitching at least 217 innings in each of the last four seasons. Unlike Mussina, he is not economic with his pitches and many people feel that he has been overworked in his early years. However, he's shown no real signs of arm trouble and there are those who think he might be one of those pitchers who is a sponge for abuse. While he will suffer through arm fatigue from time to time, he may not be a real risk to be out for an extended period of time.

That leaves the other three pitchers, which is where the real trouble lies.

Brown pitched 211 innings last year, but he only pitched 179.1 innings in the previous two seasons combined. He'll be 39 years old when the season opens, and he has an injury history as long as his 6-foot-4 frame. Before those two injury-plagued seasons, Brown pitched at least 230 innings in five straight seasons for a total of 1209.2 innings. He's thrown over 3,000 innings in his career and at this point he's probably more likely to make 15 starts than he is to make 35 starts.

Contreras, as I said, was limited to just 71 innings last year due to injuries. Who knows what his pitching history looks like and who knows exactly how old he is? Could he make 35 starts and pitch 230 innings? Yes, he probably could. Could he be limited to 15-20 starts and 100-130 innings? Yes, he probably could.

Lieber did not pitch at all last year and was limited to 141 innings in 2002 by an elbow injury that required Tommy John surgery. There is absolutely no way to know how much or how well he'll be able to pitch for the Yankees because he hasn't been able to pitch for a year and a half. Before his injury, he was very durable for three years. If the Yankees get from him what the Cubs got from him from 1999-2001, they'll have the best fifth starter in baseball. But it's just as possible that injury and/or ineffectiveness could cut his season short.

So, the Yankees have two reliable arms and three large question marks. Every team, no matter how dependable its five starters, needs a backup plan in case somebody needs to miss a start for one reason or another. Last year, the Seattle Mariners were the only team to make it through the entire season using just five starting pitchers. Atlanta and Chicago both used seven starting pitchers and the Braves got 159 starts from their five most-used starters.

The average team last year used 10.6 starting pitchers and got 133.5 starts from its top five starters. Those numbers are obviously skewed by a few teams who had so few quality pitchers that their rotations were revolving doors all season, but it still shows how unlikely it is for a team to make it through an entire season without needing at least a dozen or so spot starts.

In fact, only six team last year (including the Yankees) did not need more than 12 "spot" starts. I suppose it's possible New York could fall in that group, but given the question marks in their rotation I think New York will be closer to five pitchers making 133 starts than five pitchers making 162 starts.

So, who will be making the 12-25 starts that are not made by New York's top five? Well, the best option for the Yankees would probably be to go out and sign another starting pitcher. If they really wanted to make a New York-sized splash, they could lure Greg Maddux to the Big Apple. That probably won't happen, but it's certainly possible that the Yankees will sign another starting pitcher or two before spring training opens.

If they don't, then the spot starter will probably be Jorge DePaula. DePaula gets some attention as a prospect, but I think that's just because he's the best thing the Yankees have left. He's 25 years old and he spent most of last season at Class AAA Columbus, where he pitched 167.2 innings while posting a 4.35 ERA with just 125 strikeouts (6.71 K/9IP) and 57 walks (.306 BB/9IP). He also served up 22 home runs (1.18 HR/9IP).

I'm not trying to knock the Yankees starting rotation, because it's very good. However, some people are getting ahead of themselves by saying it's better than last year's. The Yankees 2004 rotation will be better than the 2003 version if everybody stays healthy, but that's a very big if. And the rotation would look a lot more like 2003's if Wells was still around to be the fifth starter, which would allow Lieber to hang around as insurance.

Another effect of Wells changing his mind is that the Yankees do not have a single left-handed starting pitcher (even DePaula is right-handed). It's generally thought that when pitching in Yankee Stadium, it's better to be left-handed than right-handed. That may well be true, but as Brian Cashman said and Rob Neyer noted in his chat today, given a choice between a great right-hander and a good left-hander, you should always take the great right-hander. However, it's worth noting something in regard to the lack of lefties in the Bronx rotation.

The New York Yankees top competition for the AL East is the Boston Red Sox. The Yankees will face the Red Sox 19 times in the regular season, and possibly (as they did last year) seven more times in the playoffs. The Boston Red Sox hit .290/.365/.505 (.870) against right-handers and .285/.347/.456 (.803) against left-handers last year. That is at least part of the reason the Red Sox went 69-40 when a righty started against them and 26-27 when a lefty started.

Those splits might not be quite so extreme this year with Todd Walker being replaced by Pokey Reese and Mark Bellhorn this season, but it seems certain that the Red Sox will hit significantly better against righties than against lefties. For the team that is most concerned with defeating the Red Sox, it must be disconcerting to know that you always have to use a starting pitcher who throws with the hand the Red Sox prefer.

And yes, I'm aware that the Red Sox also do not have any left-handed starting pitchers. However, the Yankees split wasn't nearly as extreme (.791 OPS vs. lefties, .816 OPS vs. righties) and Gary Sheffield will make it even closer because he hits lefties much better than righties.

I was actually going to talk about what Wells' decision means for the Padres too, but I've already spent too much time talking about what it means for the Yankees. So, tomorrow I'll have more to say about Wells changing teams. If you're already tired of reading about Wells, I'm sorry. I promise that tomorrow will be the last time I talk about him for awhile.

Fantasy football

Here's the link to my final fantasy football column of the season:

Fantasy football: Holmes easy pick for MVP

Ho Ho Ho, Merry Everybody!

Merry Christmas everybody (unless you don't celebrate Christmas, in which case you should just have a nice Thursday). I hope you all have a very happy holiday and I'll probably be back on Friday.

Fun with free time

For some reason (probably because there's nothing going on today), I was thinking about Manny Ramirez today. I wanted to see just how good a hitter he's been, so I headed over to Baseball-Reference.com to check out his player page. While I was there, I was completely blown away by something.

No, it wasn't the fact that he's had a batting average of at least .325 in five of the last seven seasons. It also wasn't the fact that his OBP has only dipped below .400 twice in the last nine seasons (and one of those times it was .399). Nor was it the fact that he's had an SLG above .585 in six straight seasons. It wasn't even that his OPS+ has been at least 140 for the last nine seasons and at least 160 for the last five seasons.

No, the thing that blew me away regarding Ramirez doesn't even have anything to do with his offensive performance, at least not directly. It has to do with a table that can be found at the very bottom of the page -- his salary table. What blew me away was that in eight seasons with the Cleveland Indians, Ramirez made just 75-percent as much money as he made last year with the Boston Red Sox.

Think about that. The Indians paid the grand total of $15.2-million for eight seasons in which Ramirez hit .313 with 237 doubles, 236 homers and 804 RBI in 967 games. Let me put it another way. The Indians paid $64,406.78 for every home run Ramirez hit for them. Last year, the Red Sox paid $540,540.54 for each of Ramirez's 37 homers. In case you don't want to do the math, that's 8.39 times as much money per home run.

The difference is almost as significant if you use runs created. The Indians paid $18,181.82 for each run created Ramirez provided for them. Last year, the Red Sox paid $141,843.97 for each of his 141 runs created. That's 7.8 times as much money per run created.

John Hart is taking a lot of crap for what's going on in Texas right now, but he sure knew how to lock players up in order to save money when he ran the Indians.

Closing the books on a trade

Recent events have finally closed the books on a trade that was made very early in the off-season. The trade to which I'm referring is Houston's trade of Billy Wagner to Philadelphia for Brandon Duckworth, Taylor Buchholz and Ezequiel Astacio. When the trade was made, I was skeptical of how good a trade it was for both teams.

For Philadelphia, there was no doubting the quality of the reliever they acquired in Wagner, but I thought it might limit their ability to help a rotation that I thought needed some help. For Houston, saving $9-million was nice, but I wasn't sure they would actually use that savings to improve the team.

Well, after trading for Wagner and his $8-million salary, the Phillies traded for Eric Milton and his $9-million salary. They then surprisingly offered arbitration to Kevin Millwood and he accepted, meaning that he will also take up a hefty chunk of Philadelphia's payroll. Meanwhile, Houston did use the Wagner savings on the team, signing Andy Pettitte to a three-year contract worth $31.5-million.

So, both Philadelphia and Houston alleviated any concerns I had about the quality of this trade for either team. The funny thing to me now is the perception of each team in this off-season. Lots of people are talking about Philadelphia as the best team in the NL right now, while most people simply think the Astros are doing a good job considering their budgetary limitations.

Well, you might be surprised to hear this, but Philadelphia and Houston are remarkably similar. Both teams have good offenses, good starting rotations and good bullpens. Both teams also underachieved last year and both teams could have made the playoffs last year, but folded in the final weeks.

Houston went 87-75 last year, but scored 805 runs and allowed 677 runs for a Pythagorean record of 95-67. Philadelphia went 86-76, but scored 790 runs and allowed 697 runs for a Pythagorean record of 91-71.

And how do the teams stack up heading into 2004? Well, let's take a look.

First of all, both teams have offenses that, while good, have holes in two or three spots. Let me list the potential starting lineups for each team, with last year's OPS+ in parentheses for each player.

Philadelphia
C - Mike Lieberthal (119)
1B - Jim Thome (151)
2B - Placido Polanco (112)
3B - David Bell (56)
SS - Jimmy Rollins (88)
LF - Pat Burell (89)
CF - Marlon Byrd (109)
RF - Bobby Abreu (134)

With 85 games played, Bell is the only player on that list who didn't take the field at least 120 times last year. He should play more often and he should hit better this year, but even at his best he won't be better than an average offensive player. Burrell should bounce back from an awful season and Byrd should continue to improve while Chase Utley may play second base more than Polanco. Thome, Lieberthal and Abreu should be just as good as they were last year and Rollins should be just as bad as he was. Essentially, I'd expect the Phillies offense to improve by 20-40 runs, which would put them above 800 runs scored.

Houston
C - Brad Ausmus (54)
1B - Jeff Bagwell (127)
2B - Jeff Kent (118)
3B - Morgan Ensberg (130)
SS - Adam Everett (79)
LF - Lance Berkman (137)
CF - Craig Biggio (95)
RF - Richard Hidalgo (142)

For Houston, I'd expect the offense to be at least as good in 2004 as it was in 2003. Berkman should be a little better, but Hidalgo should be a little worse. Ensberg should play more than 127 games, but he may not hit as well as he did in those 127 games. Kent should play more games and may hit a little better, but either Bagwell or Biggio could decline a little.

So, both Philadelphia and Houston should score at least 800 runs in 2004, which should put them both in the top five in runs scored in the NL again.

On the pitching side of things, both teams are once again very similar. Both teams have solid starting rotations that will likely include a pitcher who did little or nothing in 2003.

The Phillies will go with Millwood, Milton, Vicente Padilla, Randy Wolf and Brett Myers. Last year, Millwood, Padilla, Wolf and Myers combined to give the Phillies 823.2 innings with a 4.06 ERA and I doubt they'll be much different in 2004. In the fifth spot, the Phillies got a 4.95 ERA in 145.1 innings last year, and Milton should be able to improve upon that pretty easily. I'd say Philadelphia's rotation should be about 10-20 runs better than it was last year.

In Houston, the rotation looks like it will be Pettitte, Roy Oswalt, Wade Miller, Carlos Hernandez and Tim Redding. It's harder to predict Houston's rotation's performance for 2004 because Oswalt has a bad injury history, Pettitte is switching leagues and Hernandez didn't pitch at all last year. Still, the Astros used a dozen starting pitchers to rack up a 4.29 ERA last year, and I'd have to think they can do at least that well this season.

Finally, we get to the bullpens. Philadelphia got a solid 3.72 ERA from its relievers and will pretty much be using Wagner and Tim Worrell to replace Jose Mesa, Mike Williams, Carlos Silva and Dan Plesac. The four departing relievers posted a 4.90 ERA in 200.1 innings. Wagner and Worrell posted a 2.30 ERA in 164.1 innings. I don't know if Worrell will be as good in 2004 as he was in 2003, but I think it's safe to assume that the Phillies bullpen will be significantly better than it was.

In Houston, the Astros will be without Wagner and his 248 ERA+ in 86 innings, but they've still got Octavio Dotel, Brad Lidge and Ricky Stone, who combined to post a 3.25 ERA in 255 innings. Houston's bullpen will probably be worse in 2004, but I don't think it will be that significant, especially since the relievers shouldn't have to throw 581.1 innings again.

So, taking a look at all the quick and dirty predictions I've done here, I think Houston and Philadelphia will both score 810-830 runs and will both allow 660-680 runs. That would give both teams a Pythagorean record of between 95-67 and 99-63. Those may be a little high as expectations for these teams, but my ultimate point is that the teams aren't very different. So why is the perception surrounding them different?

Two reasons. First, Philadelphia's main division competition (Atlanta and Florida) has gotten worse this season while Houston's main division competition (Chicago Cubs) has gotten at least a little better. Second, Philadelphia has spent a ton of money while Houston has merely dumped one contract in order to be able to sign another.

Make no mistake about it, though. If Philadelphia deserves to be discussed as potentially the best team in the NL, then so does Houston. Sometimes, the payroll just doesn't really matter that much.

A delightful interview

Rich Lederer has his latest interview posted. This time he chats with Aaron Gleeman, who is probably the best baseball blogger out there. Head on over and check it out.

Fantasy football

Here's my fantasy football column for this week:

Fantasy football: For those with an eye on next year, here are 20 keepers

He's dead to me now

I was looking forward to the clock striking 5 p.m. on Thursday. Why? Because I wanted all of the rumors surrounding the Boston Red Sox, Texas Rangers, Alex Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez and Nomar Garciaparra to be over with. At this point, I didn't even care whether or not the traded happened, I just wanted the whole ordeal to end. I was tired of spending so much time thinking about it.

Well, the deadline came and passed and the Red Sox and the Player's Association were not able to come to an agreement and Bud Selig ended the negotiating window, and somehow the trade is still not dead yet. Well, it is for me. I'm through with it. From this moment forward, I'm just going to operate under the assumption that Ramirez and Garciaparra will be playing for the Red Sox when the 2004 season opens. The only thing that will make me think otherwise is a press conference with Rodriguez putting on a Boston jersey.

So, since the Red Sox are not trading for Rodriguez, I'm going to give my take on what's in store for Boston now that perhaps the most talked about non-trade has, in fact, not happened. First, let's address the reason some (many?) people think the deal is not dead after all.

Thursday night, after the deadline had passed and no agreement had been reached, Red Sox President/CEO Larry Lucchino issued the following statement:

"The proposed trade between the Boston Red Sox and the Texas Rangers is dead. The Players Association's intransigence and the arbitrary nature of its action are responsible for the deal's demise today. Reports that negotiations are continuing and shall continue are inaccurate."

Obviously that quote isn't a reason to think the deal still has life, but Texas GM John Hart contradicted Lucchino by saying there is still a possibility that the trade could be made and that he expects Texas owner Tom Hicks to continue talking with the Red Sox about the trade.

These conflicting statements caused many people to believe that Lucchino is just posturing to put pressure on Hicks to reduce his demands for the Red Sox to pay a portion of Ramirez's contract. The main reason people think this is that they think the Red Sox have gone too far in this to go back. They think that this whole situation has progressed to the point that the fans, Ramirez and Garciaparra will all be distraught if the trade ends up not happening. Well, let's look at those parties one at a time:

The fans - You may or may not realize it, but Red Sox fans are pretty well split on this trade. Some fans are going to be upset if the trade does not go through because they were so looking forward to the arrival of Rodriguez in Boston. Some fans are going to be upset if the trade does go through because they are very fond of Garciaparra and don't want to see him go.

When I went home for Thanksgiving, I visited a friend from college and at some point our conversation turned to the Red Sox and Rodriguez. My friend's mom was there and she asked me what would happen to Garciaparra if the Red Sox traded for Rodriguez. My response was that he would get traded elsewhere. What did she think of that?

"Uh-uh. I don't like that," she said while shaking her head.

A great many Red Sox fans feel the same way, so this trade won't please all of the Red Sox fans whether it happens or not. Plus, Boston's front office isn't in the business of placating the fans. It's in the business of building a winning baseball team. If attempting to do that results in some fans getting their hopes up for no reason, then that's too bad, but there's nothing to be done about it.

Ramirez - Ramirez has seemingly been unhappy ever since he arrived in Boston. This season, he cause quite a stir by missing a series against the Yankees with an illness, but being healthy enough to visit a friend at the Ritz. A friend who happens to play for the Yankees. When the season ended, Ramirez apparently expressed a desire to play for the Yankees. The Red Sox placed Ramirez on irrevocable waivers, but the Yankees (and every other team) passed on the opportunity to obtain the services of Ramirez.

So, Ramirez was stuck on a team he didn't want to be on. Except that his agent recently announced that Ramirez does, in fact, want to be in Boston after all. It was probably just posturing so that Ramirez would look like the good guy, but it was there nonetheless: Ramirez wants to be in Boston, but Boston doesn't want him. Clearly, this is a situation in which Manny cannot exist, and certainly it's a situation in which Manny can't be as productive as normal. Isn't it?

No, it absolutely is not. So, the Red Sox aren't entirely thrilled by the prospect of having Ramirez on the team, so what? Is that going to make Ramirez a worse hitter? From what I understand, the one thing that Ramirez loves more than anything is hitting. He spends a ton of time working on his hitting and the only situation that would probably make him truly happy is the one in which he is allowed to just hit to his heart's content and not worry about anything else at all.

That situation does not exist. Not in Boston, not in Texas and certainly not in the Bronx. Wherever Ramirez goes, he's going to have to deal with the media to some extent and eventually he's going to get frustrated and express his displeasure. That does not mean he's going to start hitting worse.

Manny Ramirez is a hitter. It's what he does and it's what he loves to do. He takes great pride in it, and he's not going to do a worse job at it just because you or anybody else doesn't like him.

Garciaparra - Garciaparra became a Boston icon almost as soon as he joined the Red Sox. Over the course of his career, he has become the most idolized Boston athlete of this generation. However, he's always been reluctant to deal with the press, and many people have speculated that he'd rather play baseball on the West Coast, where he grew up.

However, having turned down a contract extension in spring training, Garciaparra is now heading into the final season of his contract. When news of the potential trade for Rodriguez became public, Garciaparra expressed his desire to remain in Boston, saying that he and his new wife, Mia Hamm, were purchasing a house near Boston and that he wanted to finish his career in Boston. However, most people seem to think Garciaparra will be unable to return to Boston now that the Red Sox have openly courted his replacement.

Why? If Garciaparra is the starting shortstop for the Red Sox on Opening Day, is he going to perform worse than he would have had the Red Sox not tried to replace him? Of course not. He'll be in the final year of his contract, after all, and he'll need to have a good season to get the new contract he feels he deserves. Boston's actions this off-season may have made it harder to negotiate an extension with Garciaparra, but it certainly doesn't make it impossible for Garciaparra to be the starting shortstop for the Red Sox in 2004.

So, there's no reason the Red Sox can't go into next season with Garciaparra still on the team and, if his interest in remaining in Boston for the rest of his career is genuine, discussions about a new contract should not be derailed just because the Red Sox showed interest in a different shortstop.

Okay, so we've got that settled. The Red Sox have not alienated Garciaparra, Ramirez or the fans to the point that the world will end if this trade does not happen. In fact, the Red Sox pretty much have all the leverage here. They are perfectly capable of proceeding with the team as is. If the Rangers feel that what Rodriguez has done this off-season will make things too difficult to keep him on the team, then they can bite the bullet and trade him to Boston at Boston's price.

Since I'm no longer concerned with the trade for Rodriguez, it's time to examine the Red Sox roster should they not make any more significant moves, which I hope is the case. Here's how it looks:

Starting lineup
C - Jason Varitek
1B - Kevin Millar
2B - Mark Bellhorn
3B - Bill Mueller
SS - Nomar Garciaparra
LF - Manny Ramirez
CF - Johnny Damon
RF - Trot Nixon
DH - David Ortiz

Bench
Pokey Reese
Backup catcher
Fourth outfielder
Utility player
Extra utility player?

Starting rotation
Pedro Martinez
Curt Schilling
Derek Lowe
Tim Wakefield
Byung-Hyun Kim

Bullpen
Keith Foulke
Scott Williamson
Mike Timlin
Alan Embree
Bronson Arroyo
Ramiro Mendoza
Rule V Draftee?

That is a pretty good team. For starters, the pitching is obviously better than it was last year. The bullpen is a lot more settled and the rotation features Schilling instead of John Burkett, which is a tremendous improvement.

The offense looks pretty darn good too. It's almost the same offense that scored 962 runs last year. I would expect Garciaparra and Ramirez to do about what they did last year, I would expect Mueller to decline significantly, I would expect Nixon, Varitek and Ortiz to decline slightly, I would expect Millar and Damon to improve slightly and I would expect Bellhorn to give them at least as much offensively as Todd Walker did.

So, with the pitching improving significantly and the offense declining marginally, if at all, the team looks to be very much improved overall. Why would any fan have a problem with this team? Why would any players have a problem being part of this team? I love this team and I wish I could watch it play now instead of having to wait another few months.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a busy day ahead of me. I have to spend most of the day reading, so I can figure out if this damn trade for A-Rod is going to happen or not.

Wagons East!

It seems that the AL East is the place to be. The Yankees, Red Sox and Orioles all have a lot of money to spend and the Blue Jays have a very smart front office to help make up for the fact that they don't have as much money. In case you haven't noticed, all of that has resulted in a lot of quality players moving into the AL East this off-season. That gravitation of talent has some people wondering if it will be a lot harder for the second-place team in the AL East to win the wild card than it otherwise would have been.

Well, it's true that the AL East is a tougher division now than it was when the season ended. The top four teams in the AL East have all gotten better talent-wise since the season ended. Meanwhile, in the other two AL divisions, the third-place team has improved itself while the top two teams have gotten worse. Let's take a look at the 10 teams that either had a shot at the playoffs last year or have gotten significantly better this off-season.

New York Yankees

The Yankees have (or soon will have) added Javier Vazquez, Kevin Brown, Gary Sheffield, Kenny Lofton, Tom Gordon and Paul Quantrill. They've lost Andy Pettitte, Roger Clemens, Nick Johnson and Jeff Weaver.

I don't think anybody can seriously argue that the Yankees haven't improved themselves. I love Johnson's potential, but Sheffield's a better, and certainly more durable, offensive performer. So, the offense should be better in 2004 than it was in 2003 unless Jason Giambi and Bernie Williams completely fall apart.

Last year's Yankees rotation was Mike Mussina, Pettitte, Clemens, David Wells and a combination of Weaver and Jose Contreras. This year's rotation looks like Mussina, Vazquez, Brown, Wells and Contreras. Mussina should be better than last year, Vazquez and Brown should be at least as good as Clemens and Pettitte were, Wells will probably be worse than he was last year and Contreras should certainly be better than the combination of him and Weaver from last year (since Weaver made 24 starts and Contreras made nine). So, overall, I think the Yankees rotation looks at least a little bit better than it did last year.

Finally, the bullpen should be better with Gordon and Quantrill than it was last year. So, the Yankees look to be better on paper than the team that won 101 games and went to the World Series last year. I know they're old and there are a lot of question marks and there could be personality issues and they don't know how some of their new players will play in New York and on and on and on. They still have to play the games, no doubt about that, but the Yankees look to be improved.

Boston Red Sox

The Red Sox have added Curt Schilling and Keith Foulke. They've lost Todd Walker, John Burkett, Todd Jones, Robert Person and Jeff Suppan.

It's pretty simple, the two pitchers Boston's added so far had a 2.65 ERA in 254.2 innings last year while the four pitchers the Red Sox have lost so far had a 5.39 ERA in 285.2 innings last year. It's pretty clear that the Red Sox pitching staff is quite a bit better right now than it was when the season ended. I really hope the Red Sox keep both Byung-Hyun Kim and Scott Williamson, but the pitching staff should be better even if they cannot.

Some people think Kim could be about as good as Schilling in 2004 and some people don't think Foulke is that big an improvement over Williamson. I disagree with both sets of people.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Kim is able to post the same ERA as a starter in 2004 as Schilling. I think that's a big leap, but let's make it just for the sake of argument. Over the last three seasons, Schilling has averaged 7.28 IP/GS. If he's able to make 33-35 starts, and I don't think there's any reason to expect that he won't be able to, then he'll throw 230-260 innings. In his dozen starts last season, Kim averaged 6 IP/GS. Even if he improves by a third of an inning, he would only throw 220 innings if he makes 35 starts. So, not only do I think Schilling will pitch better than Kim, he's almost sure to pitch more than Kim as well.

Williamson has been a very good reliever in his career. He was a workhorse in his first two seasons, 205.1 innings while posting a 2.89 ERA. Then he got hurt, and in the two seasons since recovering he's only pitched 136.2 innings while posting a 3.49 ERA. He may still be able to provide the quality he did during his first two seasons, but he's no longer able to provide the quantity. Meanwhile, Foulke has averaged 88 innings pitched over the last five seasons while compiling an ERA of 2.48. He's a better pitcher than Williamson (at least slightly) and he's able to pitch 15-20 more innings than Williamson is.

So, even if Kim and Williamson are both gone by the time Opening Day rolls around, the Red Sox pitching staff will be improved. If they are both still in Boston, the pitching staff will simply be even better.

Most people expect the offense to decline, but the only player they've lost from that offense so far is Walker. Also, they've reportedly purchased Mark Bellhorn from the Rockies. Bellhorn probably won't be the full-time second baseman, but if he was, he would be better defensively than Walker and he could be better offensively as well.

The Red Sox did see four players (Bill Mueller, Trot Nixon, Jason Varitek and David Ortiz) have career-type seasons, but I think Mueller is the only candidate to really slide most of the way back to his normal production. Also, the Red Sox were by some accounts pretty inefficient on offense last year, and should have scored 80 more runs than they did based on all of their other numbers.

Let's assume the worst case scenario, that while the pitching has gotten better, the offense has gotten worse. If you think the offense will score 80 fewer runs, I don't think it's unreasonable to think the defense will also allow 80 fewer runs. That would put the Red Sox at 882 runs scored and 729 runs allowed. That would give the Red Sox a Pythagorean Record of 96-66 (their Pythagorean and actual records were both 95-67 in 2003). So even the worst case scenario, in my opinion, has the Red Sox improving by a game.

Toronto Blue Jays

The Blue Jays added Ted Lilly, Miguel Batista, Pat Hentgen, Kerry Ligtenberg and Justin Speier. They lost Bobby Kielty, Mark Hendrickson, Kelvim Escobar, Mike Bordick, Corey Lidle and Tanyon Sturtze.

Toronto scored a lot of runs last year -- 895 to be exact. With most of the offense returning and a few players likely to improve and a few players likely to regress, the Blue Jays will score a lot of runs again this year. The Blue Jays also gave up a lot of runs last year -- 826 to be exact.

In an effort to improve that number, they replaced Escobar, Hendrickson, Lidle and Sturtze with Lilly, Batista, Hentgen, Ligtenberg and Speier. The four pitchers who have left posted a 5.29 ERA in 620.2 innings. The five pitchers who have arrived posted a 3.93 ERA in 665 innings. Those numbers don't say anything about where or in what roles each of the pitchers pitched, but I think they do show that the Toronto pitching staff should be significantly better than it was last year. When you replace over 600 terrible innings with over 600 above average innings, that's a very good thing.

With the offense probably staying about the same and the pitching probably getting significantly better, it's pretty hard to expect the Blue Jays to be any worse than they were in 2003, when they won 86 games and should have won 87 based on their run differential.

Baltimore Orioles

The Orioles have only added Miguel Tejada so far and they've lost Hentgen, Ligtenberg, Deivi Cruz, Tony Batista and Brook Fordyce. However, they're supposedly going to add Vlad Guerrero and either Ivan Rodriguez or Javy Lopez as well. If the Orioles do make those two additional signings, then the AL East could very well be home to the four best offenses in the league in 2004.

Even without signing Guerrero and Rodriguez or Lopez, the Orioles have helped themselves significantly by upgrading from Cruz to Tejada. Cruz hit .250/.269/.378 (.647) for an OPS+ of 72, his third straight season with an OPS+ below 80. Tejada hit .278/.336/.472 (.807) for an OPS+ of 117, his fourth straight season with an OPS+ above 110.

And while I listed Cruz, Batista and Fordyce under the losses part of the ledger, they really aren't losses at all. Just like Cruz, Batista made outs 73-percent of the time, hitting .235/.270/.393 (.663) for an OPS+ of 76. While that's a significant dropoff from what he did in 2002, Batista's career OBP is .302, so it's not like he's ever been really valuable. Fordyce, meanwhile, hit .273/.311/.371 (.682) for an OPS+ of 83, his best season in the past three years.

Even if the Orioles just replace Batista and Fordyce with average hitters, the offense will be better. If they replace them with good hitters like Guerrero and Rodriguez, the offense will be significantly better than last year, when it scored 743 runs. Still, you can't get too crazy with your expectations for the Orioles, because they really don't have much in the way of a pitching staff.

Minnesota Twins

The Twins have only added Joe Nathan and Carlos Silva. They've lost LaTroy Hawkins, Eddie Guardado, A.J. Pierzynski, Eric Milton, Dustan Mohr, Kenny Rogers and Rick Reed.

Minnesota is burdened by a low budget, and that has caused the Twins to have to make some tough choices. Hawkins and Guardado were their two best relievers last year and they would have liked to have kept at least one of them. They could not, however, and at the moment the bullpen is worse than it was last year because Nathan and Silva are simply not as good.

Pierzynski was traded because the Twins have uber-prospect Joe Mauer, and they apparently feel comfortable giving him the starting job without seeing him play a single inning in AAA. I think Mauer will become an excellent player, but I don't think he'll be as good for the Twins in 2004 as Pierzynski would have been. The rest of the offense is still kind of up in the air. Mohr wasn't going to play much anyway as Shannon Stewart and Torii Hunter are penciled into two of the three outfield spots, and Michael Cuddyer will probably get the final one after Jacque Jones is traded.

The big problem for the Twins is the starting rotation. They didn't lose anybody who was great for them last year, but with Joe Mays out for the year, Minnesota now has just three starting pitchers. Unless they sign a free agent or two before the season starts, they're counting on Johan Santana, Brad Radke and Kyle Lohse to stay healthy all season AND two starting pitchers to emerge from a group that probably includes Grant Balfour, Brad Thomas, Adam Johnson and Carlos Pulido. That doesn't look to me like a recipe for success.

I'd still say the Twins are the favorites to win the AL Central, but I don't think they're a good bet to improve upon their 90-win 2003 season. I simply think 85-87 wins may be enough to take the division.

Chicago White Sox

The White Sox lone addition thus far has been, drom roll please, Juan Uribe. Meanwhile, the White Sox have lost Bartolo Colon, Tom Gordon, Scott Sullivan, Tony Graffanino, Roberto Alomar and Carl Everett.

Colon pitched 242 innings last year and posted a 3.87 ERA. Replacing that many innings with that ERA is not an easy task at all. When you combine that with the fact that Esteban Loaiza is likely to experience a significant dropoff from his 2003 performance, then you can see that Chicago's starting rotation will be considerably worse.

They could probably replace the loss of Gordon and Sullivan in the bullpen if they just fixed whatever's wrong with Billy Koch, but it sounds like they're going to trade Koch away and it doesn't sound like they'll get much in return. So, in addition to the rotation, the bullpen is also likely to be worse than it was.

Finally, you get to the offense, where Everett and Alomar weren't around for all that long, but were both significantly better than the guys who will be replacing them. Losing Graffanino also hurts, because he was the perfect platoon partner for Jose Valentin, who has absolutely no business being on the field whenever a left-handed pitcher is on the mound.

The offense could get some help because Joe Crede and Paul Konerko are unlikely to duplicate their miserable performances from the first half of 2003, but the White Sox are trying to trade Konerko. Even worse, if they can't trade Konerko (and they probably can't), they might trade away Magglio Ordonez, Carlos Lee or Frank Thomas. Doing so would probably help the pitching staff (because they would be trading for pitching), but it would hurt the offense just as much.

Part of me thinks that the White Sox are still a very dangerous team, and they might be, but the rest of me thinks they're going to have trouble winning more games than they lose unless the rest of their off-season is a lot more impressive than the beginning of it has been.

Kansas City Royals

The Royals have added Matt Stairs, Benito Santiago, Sullivan and Graffanino. They've lost Raul Ibanez, Rondell White, Michael Tucker, Brent Mayne, Paul Abbott and Jose Lima.

First of all, the losses of Abbott and Lima are pretty insignificant. They combined to pitch 121 innings with a 5.06 ERA. I think the Royals can come up with a starter who can do at least that well without too much trouble.

Second, the Santiago signing will help the Royals. The team could have improved more by signing Pudge Rodriguez or Javy Lopez, but that wasn't going to happen. Santiago is 39 and he's not a great hitter, but he did hit .279/.329/.424 (.753) in a good pitcher's park for an OPS+ of 96 (he had a 107 OPS+ last year). He is replacing Mayne, who hit .245/.307/.344 (.651) in a good hitter's park for an OPS+ of 64, his third straight season with an OPS+ below 70.

Stairs is a fine replacement for Ibanez because neither of them should really play much against lefties. Over the last three years, Stairs has hit .270/.375/.517 (.892) against righties while Ibanez has hit .304/.364/.523 (.887) against righties. Ibanez (.693 OPS) has been better against lefties over that time than Stairs (.550 OPS), but you don't really want to use either of them too much against lefties. If the Royals platoon Stairs with Ken Harvey (.333/.377/.564 (.941) versus lefties last year), they will have a very, very good 1B-DH threesome (with Mike Sweeney playing every day).

The loss of White and Tucker doesn't really hurt too much because Aaron Guiel and David DeJesus should be able to join Carlos Beltran to form a pretty good outfield. The Royals might want to sign a good fourth outfielder to rotate in and out with Guiel and DeJesus, but overall the outfield doesn't look any worse than last year. The Graffanino signing helps because it means that Desi Relaford shouldn't have to provide 500 at-bats this year. Unfortunately, Graffanino and Relaford are both righties, but Graffanino's presence certainly shouldn't hurt the quality of the infield.

Sullivan is a quality reliever, and the Royals have very nice bullpen depth with him, Curtis Leskanic, Jason Grimsley, Mike MacDougal and Jeremy Affeldt. The KC rotation is a bit of a question, but there were a ton of injuries there last year. I think the Royals rotation will improve simply with some good luck this year.

So, I think the Royals have obviously improved. However, you have to remember that the Royals were a bit lucky to win 83 games last year. I think they've improved to the point where they shouldn't need to rely on being lucky to have a shot at winning half of their games. However, they're probably not good enough to win the division, unless they do have some good luck again.

Oakland Athletics

The A's have essentially only added Kielty and Mark Kotsay, but I guess you can count Marco Scutaro and Mario Ramos too if you want to. They've lost Foulke, Tejada, Lilly, Ramon Hernandez, Chris Singleton, Terrence Long, Jose Guillen and John Halama. They've also traded for Michael Barrett, but it sounds like they've already traded him to the Cubs for a PTBNL.

The outfield should be better with Kotsay and Kielty coming in and Long, Singleton and Guillen heading out. However, the catching situation will be worse, unless they've got something up their sleeves for a quality catcher. Also, Bobby Crosby is an excellent prospect who hit .308/.395/.544 (.939) in Sacramento, but I don't think he'll be quite as good a hitter as Tejada right away. At any rate, I don't think the offense will be much different. It may be a little better, it may be a little worse, but I don't think it will be a dramatic change.

The rotation should be fine with the "Big Three," although it remains to be seen how they do without Rick Peterson and Hernandez. Rich Harden should be able to take Lilly's spot as the fourth starter and somebody (maybe Justin Duchscherer) will be fine as the fifth starter.

The bullpen, however, will definitely miss Foulke. Not in the sense that they don't have a proven closer anymore, but more in the sense that it's tough to replace 86.2 innings of the quality that Foulke provided.

All in all, though, I'd expect the A's to be fine. They'll have flaws, just like they always do, and Billy Beane will do his best to fix them during the season, just like he always does. If any of the "Big Three" gets hurt, they could be in some trouble, but right now I'd expect them to win the division.

Seattle Mariners

The Mariners have added Ibanez, Guardado, Scott Spiezio and Quinton McCracken. They've lost Mike Cameron, Greg Colbrunn, Arthur Rhodes, Rey Sanchez, Armando Benitez and John Mabry. Also, they are supposedly about to trade Carlos Guillen for Omar Vizquel.

As a Red Sox fan, I'm happy about what's been going on in Seattle. However, I do feel bad for Seattle fans. Two years ago, the Mariners won 116 games and now the roster looks a bit like a joke. In the blogosphere, Peter White is considering trading in his Seattle Blue for Boston Red and the crew of the U.S.S. Mariner is downright depressed. One of them is taking a vacation from baseball to gain some serenity and another member of the crew is talking about being punished for not adhering to the Buddhist principles of ridding oneself of desires.

By replacing Cameron with Ibanez, the Mariners have made the outfield worse both offensively AND defensively. In the infield, Vizquel is a little better than Guillen defensively, but he's also significantly worse offensively AND he's more expensive. Spiezio will play third base, where he will provide better offense than Jeff Cirillo. However, Cirillo is a very good defensive third baseman while Spiezio is one of the worst defensive third basemen in the major leagues. Also, the Mariners have four hitters who are very poor hitters against left-handed pitching, but they just traded a pinch-hitter in Colbrunn who has done very well against lefties the past three years for an outfielder (McCracken) who had an OPS+ of 38 last year.

So, the defense looks worse overall, the offense looks worse overall and the bench looks worse. The rotation is almost certainly going to lose Freddy Garcia and even if Rafael Soriano gets the starting spot he deserves, the rest of the rotation will suffer from the worse defense. And the bullpen may not be any better with Guardado replacing Rhodes.

I look at the Mariners right now, and I see a team that will have serious trouble posting a winning record. Forget competing for a play-off spot, this team may have to worry about fighting the Texas Rangers to stay out of last place before all is said and done.

Anaheim Angels

The Angels have added Colon and Escobar and lost Spiezio, Brad Fullmer and Eric Owens.

The Angels had a lot of bad luck with injuries last year, especially on offense. So, even though they haven't added any hitters, they may score more than the 736 runs they scored last year just by having better luck. Of course, Fullmer was one of the unlucky injured last year, but there were several other players who should have been able to contribute more than they did.

As for Colon and Escobar, they should help tremendously. Aside from Kevin Gregg making three starts with a 1.35 ERA, the Angels best ERA from a starting pitcher last year was 3.89, and that was from Scott Shields, who only made 13 starts. Overall, the Angels starting pitchers had a 4.90 ERA, and I'd guess Colon and Escobar might be able to drop that number by about half a run.

Since the offense should get at least a little bit better, the starting rotation should get a lot better and the bullpen should still be very good, I see no reason why the Angels shouldn't be a much improved team next year. With that said, they only won 77 games last year. So, even if they improve by 10-15 games, it might not be enough to make the playoffs.

Summary

It is certain that the AL East has improved. However, since the top four teams have all improved, I don't see any reason why their records against each other should change significantly from what would have been expected. The bad news is for the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, who have probably improved a little themselves but still may get worse in the standings.

Instead of taking wins from each other, I think the AL East will just take more wins from the other two divisions. I think the AL East could see three teams win 90 games and four teams finish with winning records. Meanwhile, I don't think any AL Central team will win 90 games, and it wouldn't surprise me if four of them finish below .500.

Basically, Toronto would probably run away with the AL Central, and could certainly contend in the AL West. Baltimore could contend in the AL Central, and would fight for second in the AL West, instead of being relegated to fourth (and I'll still be surprised if that's not where they finish) in the AL East.

If you hate the East Coast and you're an American League fan, then the 2004 season may not be a lot of fun for you.

Post delay

Well, I was right in the middle of making a post when ESPN.com went down (or at least become inaccessable to me), which makes the rest of the post very difficult to complete. So, I'm going to push the post back to tomorrow and hope that things don't change too much between now and then.

As if I was there

I suspect that almost every die-hard baseball fan in America would love to have been in New Orleans this weekend, but very, very few of us were actually able to be there. Luckily, Alex Belth has given us an opportunity to live vicariously through him. He has been in the Big Easy since Friday night, and he made a post Sunday detailing his experiences at what is momentarily the center of the baseball world.

I am not recommending that you read this post, I'm demanding it. You absolutely have to head over to Bronx Banter and soak in every word of what Alex has to say, because it's simply fascinating. As one of the people in his comments section says, it may very well be the post of the year.

It's a whole new ballclub

As everybody knows, Andy Pettitte will not be returning to the New York Yankees in 2004. In all likelihood, he will be replaced by Kevin Brown. Also, Roger Clemens will not return to New York, although it sounds like he might actually return to the baseball field. Clemens has already been replaced in the rotation by Javier Vazquez.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about whether or not I think the Yankees rotation is better today than it was at the end of the season. Aaron Gleeman made an excellent post today talking about the situation and Rob Neyer's column from yesterday was also about New York's new rotation.

Both Aaron and Rob think the Yankees are better off with Vazquez and Brown than with Pettitte and Clemens and I would have to agree with them IF Brown stays healthy. Given his injury history, that's a big if, but New York will still have a pretty good rotation even if Brown goes down.

However, despite the fact that the team may very well be better than it was before, many of the fans are unhappy. Mike Francessa sounded like he was on the verge of tears yesterday on "Mike and the Mad Dog." My best friend is a huge Yankees fan and he has a Tino Martinez jersey that he always wears for important games.

However, he wanted to get a new jersey, and he didn't know who to get. He doesn't want to follow the flock and get Derek Jeter and he doesn't really like most of the new Yankees. I attended game two of the ALCS with him and you may remember that Pettitte won that game to even the series. My friend said to me that if Pettitte re-signed with the Yankees, he would be purchasing a Pettitte jersey. Obviously, Pettitte did not re-sign, and my friend called me yesterday to ask if I was watching "Mike and the Mad Dog." So, I asked him whose jersey he was going to get now.

His answer: "I'm not getting any jersey for this goddamn team this year."

The problem, if you can call it that, is that Yankees fans have been able to have their cake and eat it too for a long team. They have had a very good, very expensive team, but it has been a largely homegrown team with a lot of players who are very easy to root for. Now the team is still very good and very expensive, but it is no longer largely homegrown and it is no longer stocked with players who are easy to root for.

There are only four players left from the four World Series dynasty: Jeter, Jorge Posada, Bernie Williams and Mariano Rivera. Those four and Alfonso Soriano are pretty much the only homegrown players on the team.

The entire starting rotation has been shipped in either via free agency (Mike Mussina, Jose Contreras, David Wells and Jon Lieber) or trades (Brown and Vazquez). If Williams ends up moving to DH, then the outfield may be Gary Sheffield, Kenny Lofton and Hideki Matsui, which would take some getting used to from Yankees fans. And most New Yorkers seem to have very little affection for corner infielders Jason Giambi and Aaron Boone.

So, this isn't a team that most Yankees fans are going to get all warm and fuzzy about right away. Also, for the first time in a long time, most Yankees fans don't seem to be confident about the team. In the past, even when the Yankees struggled, their fans wouldn't worry because they could tell themselves things like, "We're the Yankees, we've got players who know how to win and they'll put it together."

I'm not saying that helps the team or hurts it, but if this Yankees team starts off slowly, they are not going to get a break from the fans or the media. And while I don't believe in chemistry or anything like that, things can snowball if an entire city gets down on a team and there are a whole bunch of new players who don't mesh really well.

I definitely think the Yankees are still the team to beat in the American League, but they are more vulnerable than they have been in the past. The team is very old and there are (or will be before too much longer) a lot of players who have never played in New York before. Also, the team doesn't seem to have the full support of the city behind it yet. Finally, it certainly seems like George Steinbrenner is running the show, and he hasn't always made the best decisions in the past.

One thing is for sure, recent events have made a statement I made earlier seem even more likely. Within the next five years, the Yankees will either collapse or have a payroll in the $300-million range...

Fantasy football

Here's my fantasy football column for this week.

Fantasy football: Reliable running backs are key

Sorry it's so late already, my schedule has gotten all screwed up in the past couple weeks. I'll definitely have a baseball-related post up this afternoon.

Sorry

Yesterday, I just couldn't think of anything to write about. Today, there is at least one very important happening that I would love to give my thoughts on, but unfortunately I can't. I'm a little behind in getting this week's fantasy football column done, so I'm going to have to take another day off from the blog. I'll definitely be back tomorrow.

Song dedication

I don't know if this makes me a loser or not, but when I'm in my car the only thing I listen to is a station that plays only songs from the 70's and 80's. I don't know why, but whenever I'm in a bad mood those songs always lift my spirits. One particular band does the trick better than any other.

The reason I mention this is that I wasn't in a good mood today. For a variety of reasons with which I won't bore you, I was very down in the dumps. But then I had to go somewhere in my car, and I heard a song from said band. And this song in particular made me think of a certain rumor that has engulfed my favorite team. So, I thought I'd assume the role of DJ for a bit and send out this request from Nomar Garciaparra to John Henry, Larry Lucchino and Theo Epstein. It's "Take it on the Run" by REO Speedwagon, modified slightly by Ben Jacobs:

Heard from a friend who
Heard it from a friend who
Heard it from another you been messin' around
They say you got a boy friend
You're up there every weekend
They're talking about you and it's bringing me down

But I know the neighborhood
And talk is cheap when the story is good
And the tales grow taller on down the line
But I'm on the air, babe
Saying I don't think it's fair, babe
And even if it is keep this in mind

You're talkin' to A-Rod, baby
If that's the way you want it, baby
Then I don't wanna be around
I can't believe it, not for a minute
You're under the gun so you're talkin' to A-Rod

You're thinking of your bottom lines
You're putting on your media blinds
You say I'm coming back but you won't say when
But I can feel it coming
If your offer's light I'm running
And I won't ever look back again

You're talkin' to A-Rod, baby
If that's the way you want it, baby
Then I don't wanna be around
I can't believe it, not for a minute
You're under the gun so you're talkin' to A-Rod

You're talkin' to A-Rod, baby
If that's the way you want it, baby
Then you don't want me around
I can't believe it, not for a minute
You're under the gun so you're talkin' to A-Rod

You're talkin' to A-Rod, baby
If that's the way you want it, baby
I'll say I still wanna be around
You won't believe it, not for a minute
You're under the gun so you're talkin' to A-Rod

Heard it from my wife who
Heard it from the paper who
Heard it from a source who
Heard it from a source who
Heard it from a friend who
Heard it from a friend who
Heard it from another you been messin' around

That was "Talkin' to A-Rod" by REO Speedwagon and Ben Jacobs, sent out to the Red Sox front office from incumbent shortstop Nomar Garciaparra.

Well connected

I don't know how he gets all these interviews, but Alex Belth has another great one up today. This time he chats with Sports Illustrated's Tom Verducci. Go read it or you'll be sorry.

Unfortunately, I'm going to take today off from actually writing anything myself because I woke up a little late and have stuff I need to do. But I'll definitely be back tomorrow.