The Astros in the AL may not be a new idea

 

Lance Berkman may not like the plan to move the Astros to the American League, but the team's current owner is OK with the switch. And back in 1960, the ownership group that brought Major League Baseball to Houston didn't care which league it was placed in; they just wanted a team.

From The New York Times, Oct. 17, 1960:

The Houston Sports Association, of which [George] Kirksey is the executive secretary, is a twenty-man group. No city is better prepared to introduce big league baseball than is Houston, Kirksey said.

"We have everything ready," he said. "We even have a model of the stadium that will be built once the franchise is ours. We have been planning for four years to go big league. Until about ten days ago, we didn't care whether it was the National League or the American League. But the National League moved faster and with greater sureness, and that's the way we now are committed."

Picnic in the (ball)park

Sitting in Shea Stadium's picnic area was all that I'd hoped it would be. While not quite on the level -- even a smaller level -- of Wrigley Field's bleachers, Shea's small section of metal benches and close proximity to the left fielder brings a different feel to the game.

In Flushing, the picnic area leans more toward families, with plenty of small rumps to fill seats on the bleachers and not make it feel too crowded. In Wrigleyville, the bleachers are definitely the adult section behind the curtain at the video store.

Casey and I got there early enough that we had our pick of seating areas in the top half of the bleachers; we were too late to find much open space in the first half-dozen or so rows that lead down closest to the fence. But we had a good view and didn't get too crowded out as the benches filled in.

The Mets didn't disappoint, either. In the first inning, David Wright sent a towering home run into the picnic area, about 30 feet to our left. We could see the ball quickly climb beyond the edge of the top of the stadium, a small white dot against the darkening sky that quickly grew larger as it soared toward us. It came down almost directly to our left, and when they later announced the distance as 410 feet, I had to look over at the landing spot again to see where they got that measurement from. I was certain it was 10-15 feet deeper than the 410 mark in center field, but perhaps it was further left of center than I realized. Later, Carlos Delgado provided the only other run of the game -- on a home run to the left of center that also came our way. It couldn't have gone much better.

Ironically, though, for a section named "the picnic area," the food there is a much more limited selection of the basic crap sold inside Shea Stadium. Don't get me wrong -- I love the Mets and will buy concessions from time to time. But neither New York ballpark is going to top any lists of the best ballpark food in America. Things will change when Citi Field opens next year, but for now, I always bring my own peanuts to push back hunger in case lukewarm pretzels or hit-or-miss pizza or Nathan's fries don't entice me. Having gorged ourselves at lunch earlier in the day, there was no need for us to visit the concession stand, other than the soda I got to quench my thirst. And I did nibble on a few of the peanuts in my bag.

As for the bleachers themselves, as any high school or college football fan knows, extended time sitting on the ridged metal will numb the bum and ache the back, so we took to standing between each inning and, as everyone got up for the seventh-inning stretch, made our way down to Long Ball Alley beneath the stands. There, a small souvenir stand hawks merch and a few round bar tables fill the space and give the fans a standing-room area to watch the game through the chain links in the outfield wall. Josh Willingham stood much closer to us and the crushed red brick of the warning track lay on just the other side.

Having seen a game from the press box -- also the same level as the "luxury" boxes -- there remains only one section open to fans from which I haven't watched a game, and probably never will: The StubHub DreamSeats in the left- and right-field corners. Maybe there's a chance I'll get updated at one of these last games -- 25 to go, after tonight's 8-6 win over the Marlins, and at least four I expect to attend -- but if I don't make it, I won't have any regrets. I may not remember much of the changes that have been implemented at Shea in its four decades, but I do know that the DreamSeats are less than a decade old. There's no remorse in missing out on a recent gimmick.

Was Rollins even the Phillies' MVP?

This isn't me. I'm not whining here or spitting out sour grapes (or whatever that lame phrase is). Yeah, I thought Jimmy Rollins had an amazing year and seemed to be there in so many clutch situations for the Phillies down the stretch, but he's not even the MVP of the Phillies. That would be Chase Utley, in my mind. But Utley was overlooked because he didn't have the numbers, because he missed a month.

But for those of you into WARP and VORP, this might be interesting.

Personally, I think Rollins won because:

1.) He has a big mouth. He said in January the Phillies were the team to beat, and despite one of the NL's worst pitching staffs, they were.

2.) He plays shortstop.

3.) Voters might have filed their ballots before the final day of the season, and therefore missed Matt Holliday's central role in the Rockies' surge. True, they would've also missed the Mets' collapse, but I don't think Rollins' case was built around that as much. Ryan Howard won last year without the Phillies' reaching the postseason.

What the article also illuminates is the changing definition of "valuable," led by the new and innovative ways of looking at performance and statistics. Batting average and home runs (and wins and ERA) don't tell the whole story anymore, but so long as the voters are two sportswriters in each league city who have been on the baseball beat for two decades, those statistics are going to be the ones that carry the weight. They aren't going to look at VORP or WARP or ballpark factors (and I checked -- Holliday's and Rollins' numbers on the road were pretty similar; both were helped a bit by their home parks but also held up well in the gray unis).

At least with the MVP, "valuable" is part of the definition. The Cy Young Award carries no such caveat, so in some years, the wrong guy wins just because his team reached the postseason or his offense produced a lot of wins. And don't get me started on the Heisman, which has completely lost its luster and meaning and probably hasn't been the same award since they moved the ceremony from the Downtown Athletic Club to Midtown. The Heisman, by definition but not in name, is for the "most outstanding college football player." Not "the most outstanding or valuable player[you could even insert quarterback/running back here] on the best team." Troy Smith wasn't the most outstanding player last year; Darren McFadden was. The most outstanding player this year isn't necessarily a quarterback who throws for 3,000 yards and 30 TDs and leads his team to a BCS game; it's Tim Tebow, the first player IN HISTORY to score 20 TDs each passing and rushing. Or, as ESPN Magazine argued, it's perhaps LSU DT Glenn Dorsey. Sure, Tebow may be a product of Urban Meyer's system, but he still executes against some tough competition -- particularly some fast defenses. I wouldn't knock Colt Brennan (last year) for throwing 58 TDs because of the system (though I would question the competition).

Anyway, enough with the football. I got carried away there. It'll be interesting to see over the years if the baseball awards continue to be based on home runs and wins (Troy Tulowitzki was the most impressive NL rookie in 2007, because he played the field so much -- significantly so -- better than Ryan Braun, who had the worst fielding season for a third baseman in something like 80 years). Or will the new stats -- kind of like the "new math," whatever that was -- take hold and change the way we look at players. When you look at Rollins' OPS -- which seems to be the new stat most accepted into the mainstream -- he was way down at No. 22 in the NL. The top nine were legitimate MVP contenders: Chipper Jones, Prince Fielder, Holliday, Albert Pujols, Howard, Utley, Miguel Cabrera, David Wright and Hanley Ramirez. Ahead of Rollins were guys like Pat Burrell, Corey Hart and, even with him, Jeff Kent.

To end this on a more even note, when you use the question, "Where would [the team] have been without [the player]?" Rollins and Holliday come out pretty closely. Rollins started all 162 games and set a Major League record for plate appearances because the Phillies had no other shortstop. In a pinch, Abraham Nunez would've played there, but he's not much of a shortstop anymore. Rollins also set a Major League record for at-bats in a season because he doesn't walk enough and makes a lot of outs. So if you took him away from the Phillies, they had no shortstop, but you also only took away an .875 OPS.

But if you took Holliday away from the Rockies, you're taking away a 1.012 OPS, not to mention an NL-best 142.2 runs created (Rollins had 133.4, fifth in the league).

Still close, but Holliday seemed more valuable to me.

Managers lay a golden egg

You'd think that the managers and coaches would have a better grasp of the finer aspects of the game. It's the more casual fans and lazy sportswriters who are overwhelmed by the sexiness of home runs and wins. But in this new age of baseball -- of Moneyball and trendy new stats providing a more accurate look than the old standbys, such as batting average -- maybe the old-school on-field guys just can't keep up with the "new math."

I didn't scour the NL Gold Glove Award winners when they were announced the other day. I got my text alert that David Wright and Carlos Beltran had won, and left it at that. But looking at them now, there's one oversight that stands out -- and probably foreshadows similar awards results down the road, though that may not be the case because of the different voting groups. In the NL, there's nothing to complain about in the awards for Russell Martin, Ryan Zimmerman's accomplishments. And Derrek Lee doesn't seem to be quite the glove man that Todd Helton is, but that's not even the biggest upset in the doling out of the awards, in my mind.

Troy Tulowitzki on deck

Look at shortstop, where Jimmy Rollins won the award for some reason over Troy Tulowitzki. It's not even that close. In seven fewer games and nearly 70 fewer innings, Tulo trounced Rollins in total chances (834-717), putouts (262-241, with Rollins' number buoyed by having a Gold Glover in Utley at second base) and assists (561-479). Plus, he made the same number of errors in more than a hundred more chances. And though his fielding percentage was just .002 better than Rollins', Tulo still put up a better mark with a lot more opportunities -- opportunities for mistakes. It's even more impressive when you see the young Rocky's advantage in range factor and zone rating.

So I can only guess that Rollins' bat, his East Coast location, his possition as the prohibitive favorite for NL MVP (which he'd win over another deserving Rocky, Matt Holliday) and his mouth made the difference -- all of which have nothing to do with fielding ability, which is what the Gold Glove should be. (The Rockies' postseason sweep of the Phillies wouldn't have played a factor, because the coaches and managers most likely cast their ballots in the final days of the regular season.)

I fear the same fate will befall Tulo when the NL Rookie of the Year AWard is announced, though it won't be as big a "mistake." Ryan Braun, the likely ROY, is certainly deserving. I just think Tulo had a better all-around season, while Braun attracted attention for his homer binge more than anything else. If the ROY is like the Heisman, Tulo will benefit from the Rockies' late-season run to the playoffs, when he emerged as Colorado's leader and drew some attention his way for being a better well-rounded player.

For Maine, right may be wrong

The All-Star Game selection show on TBS yesterday had the feel of CBS' annual NCAA basketball tournament selection show. TBS did its best to drag out the blasted thing, revealing the American League starters, then "breaking it down" with Cal Ripken and Tony Gwynn, then moving on to the AL pitchers (and breaking it down), then finally giving us the AL reserves. And of course there were commercial breaks in there.

When they finally made it around to the NL pitchers could I start discussing with a friend of mine how idiotic it was that John Maine was left off the team -- and not even a Final Vote candidate! -- while Cole Hamels was on the staff despite having better numbers than Maine in only two categories. And then, perhaps because of the NCAA feel to the process, I brought up the head-to-head factor: Maine and the Mets beat Hamels and the Phillies on Friday night.

But let me illustrate it for you:

Remember the Maine
	IP	H	R	ER	BB	SO	ERA	WHIP	BAA	OPS	K/9	H/9	BB/9	W	L
Maine	102	79	32	31	38	84	2.74	1.15	.215	.635	7.41	6.97	3.35	9	4
Hamels	111.2	107	51	48	29	116	3.87	1.22	.254	.758	9.35	8.62	2.34	9	4

Maine wins the head-to-head comparison pretty handily. In one less start, the Mets right-hander has 9 2/3 fewer innings, but the rest of his numbers far surpass those of Hamels. The only advantage Hamels has are in strikeouts and walks. The former is by a somewhat significant margin, but is more than balanced out by Maine's superior numbers in hits and runs allowed and the related batting average against and OPS figures. And the walks difference is only nine.

Obviously, neither pitcher was needed to fill the quota for his respective team, since both the Mets and Phillies had starters selected by the fans. The only possible explanation I can find is that Hamels is just one of three left-handers on Tony La Russa's NL squad. So maybe the micromanager felt he needed one more southpaw to neutralize the AL's lefties.

Maine's last hope lies in one of the current pitchers bowing out to rest a nagging injury or rendering himself unavailable because the game on July 10 comes too close to a Saturday or Sunday start. Sunday's starters, which would be the same as Tuesday's if rotations hold, show no pitchers currently on the NL team, though Carlos Zambrano and Roy Oswalt are up for the Final Vote. (Mine, incidentally, is going to San Diego's Chris Young.) Looking at tonight's starters -- and therefore Saturday's -- gives us only Brandon Webb, also a Final Vote candidate, and John Smoltz. So the "I'm unavailable because I pitched two days ago" route doesn't look like an option.

For the most part, this year's rosters don't seem to be too idiotic. There aren't too many players to argue over; instead, the arguments should be over whether every team should be given a representative (they shouldn't) and whether pitchers should hit (they shouldn't). Who wants to see Josh Beckett come to the plate with two outs in the first and the bases loaded? Instead, the designated hitter should be used for the game -- it is an exhibition, after all -- no matter where it is played. Vote for the AL DHs as DHs and have the NL's starting DH determined by the positional runner-up with the most overall votes.

Let's hope Maine gets his due before next Tuesday.

Looking over the NL Cy Young results

Argh. OK, so enough of this "didn't have time" crap. Chris Carpenter had but 15 wins this past season, one less than the 16 I said he'd had. Brandon Webb was indeed named the Cy Young Award winner today, after finishing the season with 16 wins, which tied him at the top of the National League.

My pick, Trevor Hoffman, finished second by 26 points, yet received 12 first-place votes to Webb's 15. It was Webb's 7-3 edge on second-place votes -- and, more importantly, his appearance on 29 of the 32 ballots, compared to just 23 of 32 for Hoffman that sealed it. Chris Carpenter also was named on 23 ballots, but only two of them placed him first.

I would love to see the breakdown of votes, similar to the way the Associated Press releases its college football votes each week.

Anyway, when I had the time, I looked at the numbers for Webb and Carpenter more closely. And they were, it turns out, surprisingly close:

	W	L	ERA	GS	CG	SHO	IP	H	R	ER	BB	SO	WHIP
Webb	16	8	3.10	33	5	3	235	216	91	81	50	178	1.13
Carpenter	15	8	3.09	32	5	3	221.2	194	81	76	43	184	1.07
				G	SV	SOp.
Hoffman	0	2	2.14	65	46	51	63	48	16	15	13	50	0.97

I added Hoffman's stats as well, though they're hard to compare, because of his different role. The Padres' closer allowed less than a baserunner per inning (he hit one batter this season), which in his role is more important than allowing just over more than one per inning as a starter, as Carpenter and Webb each did. I'm not saying Webb is a bad choice, because in a year like this, with no clear frontrunner, it's hard to say whose mediocre numbers (in relation to other cy Young winners) are better than the other guys'.

I just think that if I had a vote, I would've cast it for Hoffman, who had a direct part in 46 Padres wins, more than twice as many as Webb's 18 -- counting no-decisions that the Diamondbacks won, since a starting pitcher can have a big impact in close games. That Arizona won only two of Webb's nine no-decisions is interesting (they went 18-15 in games he started), if misleading, because the scores in those seven team losses were 3-2, 5-4, 1-0, 4-3, 11-7, 7-6 and 4-2. And both wins were by one run.

For comparison, the Cardinals went 21-11 in games started by Carpenter, winning 6 of 9 games in which he got a no-decision. The losses were by scores of 3-2, 7-6 and 8-7.

How to put Hoffman into this argument is hard to say, because by the nature of his role, he'll pitch in way more wins for the Padres than in losses. However, looking at his stats, we see the Padres lost all five games in which Hoffman blew the save, plus a sixth game in which he came into a tie game to pitch the 10th and took the loss. In the nine games that featured an appearance by Hoffman but not a win, loss or save for the closer, San Diego went 9-4. So of the 65 games in which Hoffman pitched, the Padres won 55 and lost 10. That puts the Padres' winning percentage in "Hell's Bells" games, we'll call them, at .846. In Webb games, Arizona was .545 and in Carpenter games, the Cardinals were .656.

I'm not sure if those percentages mean anything, as I said, because of the different nature of a starting pitcher's role vs. a reliever's. But there they are.

Quick prediction on NL Cy Young

Didn't have time to get this going sooner, so with less than an hour until the announcement, I'll just throw out the three presumed front-runners for the National League Cy Young Award, along with my prediction. I'm wondering if this will be a slightly different year, considering Hanley Ramirez's narrow Rookie of the Year victory over Ryan Zimmerman. But more on that when I have time.

Chris Carpenter: The reigning Cy Young holder won 16 games, which would be the lowest since the Cubs' Rick Sutcliffe went 16-1 for Chicago in 1984. But that was after he came over in a midseason trade; overall, Sutcliffe went 20-6, though I'm sure the voters were only supposed to consider his NL achievements. As for Carpenter, his Cardinals did win the World Series with the lowest win total (83) in history, so maybe he'll take a similar track to his second Cy Young.

Brandon Webb: The Arizona righty didn't lose any of his first 13 or so starts, but was just so-so over the second half. Appearing to run away with it in the early months, he became just another candidate as the season wore on.

Trevor Hoffman: There are some who say that a win for Hoffman this year -- a year without a 20-game winner or otherwise dominant starter -- would be akin to a lifetime achievement Cy Young, and perhaps a makeup honor for 1998, when Hoffman saved 53 games but lost the award to Tom Glavine. With no stellar starter, I think this just might be the year the Cy Young bell tolls for Hoffman.

Wait til next year

Well, hopefully I'll get to see the NL break the streak in person in Pittsburgh. If the AL's going to keep getting home-field advantage in the Series, then I think they should give the NL home-field advantage in the All-Star Game. At least until they win one. After Pittsburgh and San Francisco, give the game to Philadelphia, San Diego, Washington and the Mets' new stadium. And maybe by then (that would be 2012), Miami will have a new one too. Or, you know, Las Vegas will have the Marlins.

I also noticed Fox's Jeanne Zelasko is pregnant. Or she's a pumpkin. Really, who suggested that top? Maybe it doesn't look orange in person, but on screen it sure does. And the puffy sleeves? Good grief, Charlie Brown.

Just what the NL needed

Ooh, Johan Santana's in. The way he's gone lately, this should help erase a 3-0 deficit. And with that, D-Lee starts off with a double and Edmonds walks.

But leave it to a Cub to kill it with a DP. (As for how much this counts for the Cubs, see the Braves comment earlier.)

2005 National League predictions

After last year’s predictions of how each division would play out resulted in somewhat moderate success – at least they weren’t completely crap – I knew I had to bring the prognostications back for a return engagement. So let’s get to it as we bridge the space between Opening Days 1 and 2.

NL EAST
1. Braves. Last year, I thought I’d go on the record (along with hundreds of others) in calling the end of the Atlanta’s run. Instead, I learned what it means to be a Phillies fan – I was let down, yet again. So with Tim Hudson and John Smoltz now in the rotation, Chipper Jones back at third base and some young guys in other key spots, I do like the Braves’ chances in a stacked division. It won’t be as easy as some years, but they’re still the team to beat. As for what I expect from the Braves, I figure Smoltz will hit the DL at least once, perhaps for three or four weeks, as he tries to pitch 200 innings for the first time in seven years. I’m also not sold on Dan Kolb at the back of the bullpen. Something tells me he’s going to have his share of struggles. Offensively, Rafael Furcal will have a stellar season in his contract year and I see the fountain of youth at work again in one corner outfield spot – right field. Raul Mondesi will get back to 20-20 territory, while Brian Jordan will probably lose his job after further injury and may end up retiring after this season.

2. Marlins. Wild card. It’s not what I’m rooting for (more in a moment), but how can you go against this school of fish? I’m not with ESPN’s John Kruk, who calls this the best lineup in baseball (or at least the NL), because I think the Cardinals are still pretty damn good. Position-by-position, I can see the Marlins having an edge (Paul Lo Duca is better than Yadier Molina), but I think for consistency and overall firepower, St. Louis is still the measuring stick. Their pitching is impressive, but they need Carl Pavano-like emergences from Josh Beckett and A.J. Burnett. Only Burnett, like Pavano last year, is in a contract year and has that motivation. Beckett needs to stay healthy and not develop eight blisters throughout the season. And if Juan Pierre struggles to stay healthy this season, well, then they won’t even be this good.

3. Mets. The bullpen scares me. Flat out, it could mean the difference not just between a wild card and fourth place for this team, but between the division title and fourth place. If the closers stayed the same but Mets had the Phillies’ bullpen, or the Yankees’, or the Angels’, they’d probably win this division. And then, on Opening Day, they get through the seventh and eighth innings with a 6-4 lead, turning it over to closer Braden Looper, a rather reliable stopper last year … and he gives up two home runs and loses the game. Omar Minaya needs to make a move before June 1 – maybe even before May 1 – to bulk up the ’pen, or it’s going to be another long summer.

4. Phillies. Fourth place in this division will be better than second in a lot of others. It won’t be like 1973, when nobody wanted to take first place and 82 wins was enough. But it could be like that year in that the fourth-place team is still within five games of first place. The lineup should be solid (but why is Placido Polanco playing over Chase Utley?) and the starters serviceable. The bullpen is potentially the best in the division. But they’ve had high expectations for a couple of years now and have been unable to perform under that pressure. Maybe the lowered expectations and the new, laid-back manager will allow this team to relax and play to its potential.

5. Nationals. The crowds will be there, and they will be an exciting team at times, but they just don’t have the horses to keep up with the thoroughbreds in this division. There could be some excitement down inside the Beltway. Ryan Church should finish in the top three in Rookie of the Year voting and a healthy full season from Nick Johnson would show us just what he can do. I also like the chances for Jose Guillen to turn things around. Again.

NL CENTRAL
1. Cardinals. When you have a solid lineup that returns all the major components and a decent enough pitching staff that brings in one of the game’s best young lefties and remember that it’s on the team that represented the league in the World Series, you’ve got yourself a frontrunner. St. Louis is the team to beat, though there are a lot of things that could derail a division repeat. Among the internal concerns is the rotation: Can Matt Morris be an 18-game winner again? Can Jason Marquis and Chris Carpenter pitch like front-of-the-rotation starters like they did in 2004? The Cards also can’t afford to lose any of their major hitters for an extended period. They’re lucky, in a sense, that Scott Rolen went down in September, when they had a big lead and he could afford to rest up for the postseason. But it all appeared to catch up to him in the World Series. If Rolen, Albert Pujols, Jim Edmonds or Larry Walker (now that they don’t have Edgar Renteria batting second) is out for a month, they’re in trouble. The other concern is …

2. Cubs. Suppose, for a moment, that Mark Prior and Kerry Wood return when expected (Wood next week, Prior once his 15 days are up) and pitch the rest of the season. Having those two healthy for a full season (or five and a half months) may be the difference between third place and first place. Even with their absences last summer, the Cubbies still only lost the wild card in the final few days. They got younger with the departures of Sammy Sosa and Moises Alou; the problem is, they replaced them with Jeromy Burnitz and Todd Hollandsworth. That might not be enough. But this season could be where we see the true emergence of Corey Patterson, Aramis Ramirez and Derrek Lee. All three had strong seasons last year, but I think this year they all do it again, cementing their star status – or elevating it to the next level.

3. Astros. Like the Cubs, the Astros might make a run this season despite their off-season losses. Certainly, Houston is weaker without Jeff Kent and Carlos Beltran, but they’ve got promising replacements in Jason Lane and Wily Taveras. And there’s also Andy Pettitte. Though his totals were low because of injury last season, the lefty’s peripherals (a 3.90 ERA, 2.5:1 strikeout-to-walk ratio) were enough that a full, healthy season would make a big difference to the team. But they’ll also need a bullpen to get to Brad Lidge, who has to be strong enough to bounce back from a 94-inning season. In fact, Lidge has thrown 179 innings over the last two campaigns, more than any two-year coupling in his entire professional career – one that has been hampered by injuries that led to the Astros moving him from starting to relieving.

4. Reds. It could be that the NL Central is the easiest division to pick the correct order this early. These top four teams all have great potential, and it’s as if they’re ranking in descending “if” order. That is, the Cardinals have the fewest “ifs” needed to turn out their way in order to finish first; the Cubs have more than the Cards, but less than the Astros, etc. Cincinnati, with its offense and a stable of adequate pitchers with solid potential, could conceivable take the crown IF everyone stays healthy (I’m looking at you, Ken Griffey Jr.) and hits well and the pitchers fulfill all those visions so many scouts and pundits had for the likes of Paul Wilson (a former No. 1 overall pick), Eric Milton, Ramon Ortiz, Brandon Claussen, et al. The Reds’ best bet is for Austin Kearns and Wily Mo Pena to play well, allowing the team to trade one for a pitcher down the stretch. That’s not out of the question, but I’m sure the division is. Too many “ifs.”

5. Brewers. The addition of Carlos Lee and the development of youngsters like Lyle Overbay and Junior Spivey give Milwaukee some more oomph in the order. With Ben Sheets, Doug Davis and Chris Capuano developing, this Crew has some promise. Not enough to end a streak of 12 consecutive losing seasons, tied with the Pirates as the longest active streaks in the majors, but enough to give fans reason to hope things could soon be changing. Sheets’ 12-14 record could become a 16-10 record, or better, just with the extra offense the lineup – a year older and wiser, and a veteran stronger – should provide.

6. Pirates. I want to like the Bucs. Actually, I do, and it’s not all that hard. They’re an historic franchise, they have classy throwback uniforms (when they’re not wearing the black jerseys) and they play in the best ballpark in the major leagues. Jason Bay, Craig Wilson, Jack Wilson and Matt Lawton are fun to watch, and every time Oliver Perez takes the mound, he’s fired up. You can’t help but like these guys. But you don’t sign a 40-year-old catcher (Benito Santiago) when you expect to contend for anything. They still have a long way to go. It’s a shame their classy manager, Lloyd McClendon, likely won’t be the one to get there with them.

NL WEST
1. Padres. They sure showed something last year, when few were expecting it and fewer were predicting it. A few insightful observers said, Keep an eye on San Diego, and they were right. This off-season, the Padres seemed to take into account the perceived characteristics of their new park; that is, after one season where it appeared to favor the pitchers and cut down on home runs, they went out and strengthened their staff and brought in some speed. It appears that only centerfielder Dave Roberts will be the change in the defensive alignment, but he’s on the shelf with yet another injury. Xavier Nady filled in with a couple of homers today, and with his ability to play third base as well, he might not make it back to the bench, filling in for Roberts and Sean Burroughs just to get his bat into the lineup. Woody Williams effectively replaces David Wells, so nothing is lost in terms of postseason experience. The bullpen is stacked, though age may be catching up to Trevor Hoffman, as his four-run meltdown in today’s loss showed. This could be another three-team race, but the two who don’t finish on top aren’t going to be playing for a wild card.

2. Dodgers. I don’t like either the Dodgers or Giants for second place, but one of them will get it because it won’t be Colorado or Arizona. LA has good starters (particularly Derek Lowe, Jeff Weaver and Odalis Perez) and a good bullpen, but the back of the rotation (Scott Erickson? Really??) and certain spots on the field (Jose Valentin at third?) leave a bit to be desired. Eric Gagne’s injury is bad news, and if he’s out too long, they may slide too much. But I do like these guys better than the alternative up the coast …

3. Giants. Everyone likes San Fran on paper, and so do I. Only this isn’t MVP Baseball 2005 or some other simulation game where you can turn off injuries. This team is OLD. Barry Bonds has already been sidelined, and it’s hard to see the other seven position players making it through this season at their ages without incident. I’m sorry, but I think it’s just too much to rely on when you’re trying to put together a championship team. As are Kirk Reuter and Brett Tomko in the front end of your rotation. I think the Giants will put up a fight (Barry always does, whether or not it’s warranted), but it won’t be enough.

4. Diamondbacks. Well, they tried. They made some moves this off-season, but how do you go from Randy Johnson to Javier Vazquez and Russ Ortiz and compete with what lies in front of you in this division? Troy Glaus is a great move … if he’s healthy. Luis Gonzalez is back after surgery, and I do expect him to have a good year, a 35-HR, 95-RBI kind of year. But what’s to his left in the outfield? What’s Chad Tracy bring at first base? And what do you get from a middle infield of Royce Clayton and Craig Counsell (as much as I love a fellow Domer)? I think you get a lot of 12-9 (or 16-6) losses and a fourth-place finish.

5. Rockies. If nothing else, I’m excited to see some of these guys. Matt Holliday, Garret Atkins, Clint Barmes, J.D. Closser. And Jeff Francis. I think Francis could be the pitcher who really solves Coors Field – at least as much as anyone can solve it. For one thing, he’s a science buff, and that trait may be what he needs to really learn and understand what it takes to pitch at 5,280 feet. If he can keep the ball in the park enough, his peers – along with Todd Helton and Preston Wilson – should send it out enough to help him pick up some 8-6 and even some 4-3 victories. If Jason Jennings can win the Rookie of the Year award in the Rockies, Jeff Francis can do it too.

Since it’s late and I write so much, this has now become a two-part preview. I’m sure most of you who have read this far wouldn’t look too kindly upon 14 more such paragraphs looking at the American League. So that comes tomorrow.