Newsday's season preview is out today, and if you don't get the physical newspaper, you can check it all out here.
As conceived by editor Dave Whitehorn, the special section focuses on the notion of a pitching ace, what with the Mets deciding they couldn't afford not to trade for Johan Santana and the Yankees deciding against the Twins' asking price. Here is a story I wrote on this issue, while if you click "Photos: Ranking MLB teams' aces," you'll see that i attempted to, well...rank the teams' aces, from 1 through 30. In some instances, it was difficult merely deciding who constituted a team's "ace," and I'll be happy to answer any criticism concerning this selection process, as well as the actual rankings.
I'll re-print my predictions right here, with brief explanations:
AL East: 1. Red Sox; 2. Blue Jays; 3. Yankees; 4. Rays; 5. Orioles.
Thoughts: As I've attempted to opine here on the blog, over the last few months, Brian Cashman deserves praise for passing on Santana. But he'll pay a short-term fee for this bold non-move, as the Yankees' pitching carries myriad questions. The Yankees could even win 90 games and miss the playoffs, as the Jays are going to ride strong seasons by Roy Halladay and A.J. Burnett into October.
AL Central: 1. Tigers; 2. Indians; 3. White Sox; 4. Twins; 5. Royals.
Thoughts: Despite Detroit's awful spring on the pitching front, I still love their lineup, ace Justin Verlander and manager Jim Leyland. Cleveland could feel some residual fatigue from last October's run.
AL West: 1. Mariners; 2. Angels; 3. A's; 4. Rangers.
Thoughts: The Angels should've picked up another bat over the winter (sorry, Torii Hunter isn't that great a bat). With John Lackey and Kelvim Escobar down, Seattle can make the division title happen with its deeping pitching staff and strong defense.
AL Wild Card: Toronto.
ALCS: Toronto over Boston. Love that Toronto pitching staff, both starting and relief.
NL East: 1. Mets; 2. Braves; 3. Phillies; 4. Nationals; 5. Marlins.
Thoughts: Yes, the Mets have questions about pitching depth and age, but Santana makes everyone so much better. And it's easy to forget they have three elite offensive players in Carlos Beltran, Jose Reyes and David Wright.
NL Central: 1. Cubs; 2. Brewers; 3. Reds; 4. Cardinals; 5. Pirates; 6. Astros.
Thoughts: Should be a cakewalk for the Cubs, and a bad Astros team means no donuts for four brave blog commenters (scroll down to #3).
NL West: 1. Diamondbacks; 2. Dodgers; 3. Rockies; 4. Padres; 5. Giants.
Thoughts: Love the D-Backs' overall depth, and the Dodgers have a ton of talent. Much like the Yankees, the Rockies will make progress, big-picture, even while posting fewer victories.
NL wild card: Dodgers.
NLCS: Mets over Dodgers. That front four of the starting rotation cures all other ills.
World Series: The Mets close out Shea Stadium with jubilation, overcoming the Blue Jays.
MVP: David Ortiz, Boston, and David Wright, Mets.
Cy Young: Erik Bedard, Seattle, and Johan Santana, Mets.
Rookie of the Year: Evan Longoria, Tampa Bay (yes, I know he's beginning the year in the minors), and Hiroki Kuroda, Dodgers.
Manager of the Year: John McLaren, Seattle, and Lou Piniella, Cubs.
Now's your chance. Rip away. Offer countering predictions. And we'll see how everything turned out, at the end of the regular season and then again at the end of the postseason.
I bring this to your attention because, from every sale of this $99 item, Nikco is donating $10 to the Boys & Girls Club of America. For more information, call 1-800-345-2868 or visit Nikco's Web site.
Comments (33)
Ken-Gutsy call on Erik Bedard. I hope that he doesn't suffer any post-Oriole syndrome out there. Good luck with the Ducis appearance
Ken,
I couldn't agree with you more on Toronto. Their starting pitching is good, the line-up is tremendous, and even with BJ Ryan being 'nursed' back to his role --- they have Accardo to act as a league-average closer.
Ken- I mainly focused on your last-place picks and I couldn't agree more!
Great segment on ch. 5 the other night. Keep it up with Ducis!
I like the Toronto and Seattle calls.
My only worry about Toronto is that the manager John Gibbons is a hot head may not be added value during a slump and that Scott Roeln may end up being trouble for him like Shea Hillebrand.
The National League (other than the Mets) is a complete crap shoot...except for calling the Giants as a last place team
I don't know, I just don't see it with the Blue Jays. I just see another 85, 86-win season, which is only good enough for 3rd place in the AL East. I don't know if I can count on both Halladay and Burnett, as good as they are, to both stay healthy for a full season and I don't like their back-end of the rotation, though McGowan is good. B.J. Ryan is still hurting and that would worry me. Their offense is pretty good, but Rolen also is already hurting. I will assume though that Vernon Wells and Overbay will have better seasons. I didn't like the Eckstein signing and don't think he'll be a good fit there. As was mentioned, their manager is a hot head and I don't trust him either. They're pretty good, but I still see the Yanks and Red Sox are still ahead of them.
Anyway, here's my predictions:
AL East: Red Sox, Yankees (wild card winner), Blue Jays, Rays, Orioles
AL Central: Tigers, Indians, Twins, White Sox, Royals
AL West: Angels, Mariners, A's, Rangers
NL East: Mets, Phillies, Braves, Nats, Marlins
NL Central: Cubs, Brewers (wild card winner), Reds, Cardinals, Astros, Pirates
NL West: Diamondbacks, Rockies, Dodgers, Padres, Giants.
World Series: Cubs over Red Sox in 7. Pretty good ratings that would get.
One factor to contemplate with Burnett, Jeff: The almighty dollar. He last passed the 200-innings pitched mark in 2005, a walk year. And here we are, in another potential walk year (he can opt out of his final two years with Toronto). And with Ryan out last year, Accardo picked up 30 saves. All this said, I understand your reservations on the Jays.
The Jays are always the trendy pick in the A.L. and every year they disappoint. Even though Boston took two seasons off after their last W.S. they should coast this year.
So will Toronto have a better record than the Yanks/Cleveland-Detroit runnerup/Angels-Mariners runner up? No.
And they certainly wont win in the playoffs. I think the reliever is very important and I dont think they have one. I also think the White Sox may surprise this year.
I see a repeat of 86' only this time, no miracle and the Red Sox over the Mets in 5.
Ken Davidoff is a Yankee-hating moron. Hope Murdoch hires in a better Baseball writer when he buys Newsday.
Ken,
Your predictions are absolutely brilliant - spot on!
I actually know Ken for quite awhile. I honestly don't perceive him as a Yankee hating moron. In addition to that, if Ruppert Murdoch does buy Newsday, I think that he would be happy to have him as an employee
From Monty Python - dedicated to sportsa web disagreements and opinions...
M: I came here for a good argument.
A: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
M: An argument isn't just contradiction.
A: It can be.
M: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A: No it isn't.
M: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
A: Yes it is!
M: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
A: No it isn't.
Anon you wrote "Ken Davidoff is a Yankee-hating moron. Hope Murdoch hires in a better Baseball writer when he buys Newsday."
While I agree he'll feel less than brilliant with Toronto come May 13, why do I get the feeling had he wrote anything other than, "The Yankees will go 162-0, maybe 161-1 if Igawa has to start a game" you would have wrote that rant.
Seriously, who cares what fan he is/was. Plus, he already said he's not a fan of any team so its not like he's hiding anything.
And I'm sure Ken will just ignore it, but the thing I LOVE about these Newsday blogs, is you just dont get any of these type rants where if you're disagreed with, you're not called an idiot/jerk/communist. Well maybe a communist but not idiot or jerk.
I guess Ken is doing his job well because now he has been called a Mets hater and a Yankees hater in a comparatively short period of time. Ken is an excellent baseball writer with excellent sources. Murdoch will probably give him a fat raise.
Concerning today's blog: I think it will prove pretty darn accurate. It's hard to know what the Yankees will do since they have some young arms and some others that might be slowed by age and injury. Too many variables. Yes, they might win 90 games and miss the playoffs. Yes, the kids might prove better at this tender young age than people thought they would be. Pettitte might or might now have a year similar to last year. Mussina might be through or could have 10-12 wins in his arm. Who knows? Time will tell. Toronto has a history of dashing expectations. I think the Yanks and Toronto go down to the wire for the WC. Everything else looks hard to argue with.
Concerning the unfortunate (and inaccurate) comments about Ken: This blog has always taken a pretty high road and been quite dignified. I hope it stays that way. I hope the low-life posts get deleted.
Agree with Richie G. Every year people pick the Blue Jays and every year it doesn't happen. Yeah, Roy Halladay and A.J. Burnett are great pitchers, but they never stay healthy (and Burnett is really inconsistent). The only injury the snakebitten Halladay hasn't suffered is having a safe drop on his head. B.J. Ryan is rushing back from TSJ, and history tells us he won't last the year. Plus their offense isn't anything special -- Rolen already missed time, Eckstein is a horrendous offensive player, and how much does Frank Thomas have left? Wells will be better, but that's not enough.
Also, the Red Sox have their own pitching issues. As serious as the Yankees and Jays. I think Beckett will be healthy, but Dice-K looked shockingly pudgy (he's totally out of shape and he pitched like crap), Lester might not be anything but a fifth starter, we don't yet know what Buchholz is (can he show better control and get people out with a weak fastball?), and Wakefield has a bad back.
I very much appreciate those of you who came to my defense. We've managed to maintain a pretty civil level of discourse here, even when disagreeing, and I'm confident that Anon will remain an aberration. I'm not going to delete the comment, since I'm just not comfortable doing that. Ultimately, I'll take even the insults over silence. ;)
Toronto fan here-- a drunk one, if you will-- and I just wanted to weigh in on a couple of things.
There's no real consensus on the Jays this year, but most fans and media types seem concerned about the offense. If Wells and Overbay bounce back (which they should), Thomas starts better than he did last year (possible) and Rolen shows no after-effects of this finger injury while at the same time getting closer to being the hitter he was about three years ago (umm.....), they could definitely win the division. Those, however are obviously big if, and as a Jays fan, I'm not getting my hopes up only to have them dashed, because after like 15 seasons in a row of that, I'm done with it.
A couple things to dispel, though. For one, the idea that Halladay is injury prone is a bit of a mischaracterization. His most recent major injuries were an appendicitis and taking a Kevin Mench line drive off the shin. I don't think that puts him in the same category as Burnett, who has either a screwed up arm or a screwed up head. Either way, in a playoff series, those two plus Dustin McGowan (whose "stuff", they say, is as good as anyone in baseball and who last year started to finally command it) will be very, very dangerous.
And I think somebody mentioned the bullpen being weak, but that's just completely wrong. The Jays had one of the best bullpens in baseball without BJ Ryan last year, and now have the luxury of easing him back. Yes, setup man Casey Janssen is already lost for the season, but Brandon League (and his sinking high 90s fastball) was going to have that role in '07 before he was injured, and with Accardo and Downs (and some other pretty good arms, too), they're not going to miss a beat.
No, nobody is too worried about the pitching up here (except maybe depth in the rotation and maybe about possible regressions from the 4 and 5, which despite how that sounds, should be manageable). The big thing is the offense, and if I wasn't afraid to jinx it, I'd probably be with Ken in thinking that it's going to be a lot stronger than last year, and probably enough to make the playoffs (or at the very least, to FINALLY play some meaningful games in September). I mean, there is no way Wells or Overbay could be worse. Hill and Rios are on the rise. It probably comes down to Thomas and Rolen. Considering what I've heard about Rolen's shoulder feeling as good as it has in three years, and what old man Thomas did in the second half last year, I like those chances.
(But by no means would I bet on them.)
Ken Stoeten, the reason I wouldn't give too much credence to the Jays playoff hopes is I dont trust too many closers that haven't proven themselves in the playoffs. You got guys like Wagner/Hoffman who were/are close to great in regular season regularly choke in the playoffs. BJ Ryan just doesn't do it for me.
Plus, I dont think they'll be anywhere close to the playoffs in the first place. Thats so many ifs.
Hmm, I swear Boston had an inexperienced closer last year... I could be wrong though... though I never am! ;)
Ju1ced, I'm not saying inexperienced closers are never good. Jenks was great for the White Sox...but what I am saying is I typically dont trust a new reliever thats never succeeded in the post season. I mean look at Joba. Great in the regular season, but he failed in his only postseason. (Sorry, the other pitcher didn't care about the midges) I just think the closer is the most important position in baseball.
I agree with Mr Stoeten, who also drunkenly pens a nice little blog: drunkjaysfans.blogspot.com...
I think the Jays finally have it this year, and more than any other season, the AL East seems prime... the only caveat, and call me crazy, but the Rays also look to be quite a gritty team. They have nice pitching, and could steal a few...
All told, I see the East finishing with Toronto on top, as I fell Boston will pull a Milton Berle season, and turn it on only in the playoffs after securing a wild card.
In any case, I am just hoping for some meaningful games in September... it has been way too long, with way too many hopes, frauds (see Mondesi, Prokopec, Kielty et al...) an topped off with a fake soldier manager, I have high hopes for Corky Hill, Smooth Rios, and Opie Overbay this season.
I don't understand your rankings of pitchers or players. Wang the 20th pitcher on your ace list? You put Liriano, Penny, Francis, and Sheets ahead of him. I don't think so.
Beckett behind Smoltz? Nah.
You ranked Aramis Ramirez as the best hitter in the National League. He's not even the best hitter named Ramirez in the National League.
David Wright is a better hitter than Pujos? On what planet? Wright is terrific but I don't think anybody believes he is the second best hitterin the league.
I didn't see anybody talking about the rankings. Surely I can't be the only one who doen't think Aramis is the best hitterin the National League or Smolz is the 5th best Ace in baseball.
Matt, you have every right to ask such questions.
First of all, the pitchers' chart and "Best of..." list were two different animals. The pitchers' chart was put together solely by me, and I used a mix of past statistics and future projection. Wang ranks so low because his strikeouts rank so low. It's that simple. Wins were not considered, as those who read this blog regularly will understand. Even the Yankees will acknowledge, privately, that Wang is not a "classic" ace. Smoltz ahead of Beckett is an easy call. Look at just their last three years, since Smoltz became a starter again, and you can see who has the clear advantage, even given the league differential. John Smoltz is a phenomenal pitcher, even in his 40s. Beckett's body of work can't even come close.
As for the "Best of..." listings, I asked a scout from an NL team whom I really respect. He chose Aramis. I could've tweaked it (the story has my name on it, after all, not the scout's), but I chose not to. I certainly understand where you're coming from with your complaint there. It's a very subjective list.
In any case, thanks for the feedback.
The Toronto Blue Jays have no right to finish ahead of the Yankees. They have not proven to me that they can play consitantly with the Yankees and Red Sucks. Until they do, I'm not taking the Blue Jays seriously. A.J. Burnett will be on the DL more than once this year. There pitching is not good enough even with Roy Halladay. And by the way I call the Red Sox the Red Sucks because the Red Sucks fans yell Yankees (whatever) so Red Sucks fans shouldn't complain what's so ever.
The Yankees have no pitching. They have a marginally better staff than the Orioles. Ian Kennedy and Phil Hughes, while promising young talents, will not be able to carry out the back end of a rotation in this division for the entire year. And the Yankees bullpen? Yikes... Joba is not the messiah everyone seems to be making him out to be. He'll be figured out, and he will start walking people allot more than in his month or so of work last year. Mussina, Pettite and Wang are all superb #3 pitchers, and might make a good #2, but none of them have what it takes to be a big league ace anymore. Wang has won allot of games, I know, but his numbers are totally deceiving. Put him on any other team last year he would only win 10-12. Which brings me to the Yankees offence. It could be good enough to push them into contention for a playoff spot. Giambi, Cano and Damon hold the key to the Yankees making it or breaking it. Jeter sucks defensively, and he has for the last five years (gold gloves and errors don't mean anything, how many balls has he let get by him compared to say Toronto's John Mcdonald), and the outfield is shaky defensively except for Abreu. I really think that this is the year four teams in the AL East will win 80+ games, In this order:
Red Sox, Yankees, Blue Jays, Rays.
For the life of me Ken, I dont see how you disvalue wins so much. Bill James is a smart man, but lets not reinvent the game here. There's something to be said about leaving the game with the lead.
As for Becket vs. Smoltz, the one thing Becket has over every other pitcher but two is his big game performances. The two he doesn't have that over are Shilling and Smoltz. Smoltz is clearly the better regular season pitcher too.
Richie, if a pitcher throws seven shutout innings, and leaves the game with the score tied at 0-0, is there nothing to be said for that?
Wins for a pitcher completely reflect the pitcher's team, and the games in which the pitcher pitches. Randy Johnson won 17 games for the 2006 Yankees with a 5.00 ERA. Roger Clemens won 13 games for the 2005 Astros with a 1.87 ERA.
It is ridiculous, for example, to assert that Phil Niekro or Don Sutton put up better careers than Bert Blyleven, just because they had more wins.
Ken, of course a pitcher that goes 7 shutout innings and gets a ND deserves credit. But I thought you weren't a fan of the E.R.A. as well?
My point is, there is something to be said for a guy that leaves with a lead.
That's why I dont believe in Bill James no-closer role. A lot of people that can do well in the 8th cant close it out in the 9th.
And a pitcher whose up 7-0 isn't supposed to nibble. He's supposed to not walk anyone and if a run scores its no big deal. He doesn't mind the solo HR but he sure as heck doesn't want to walk the bases loaded.
Richie, now you're twisting my words, which is not appreciated. I wrote that ERA is a worse measure than strikeouts. It is absolutely a better measure than wins.
No one would dispute what you're saying about the pitcher who's up, 7-0. But if you post a 5.00 ERA, that means you're turning that 7-0 lead into 7-5, which means that you've turned a relaxing game into a stressful one. So Randy Johnson's 17 wins in '06 spoke far more to massive run support than to good pitching.
Twisting your words?? This is what I wrote: "But I thought you weren't a fan of the E.R.A. as well?" Which means exactly what it says. That I didn't think you were a fan of the E.R.A. This isn't my job so I dont take these blogs as seriously as you (and I appreciate that you do btw) but I thought I remembered you saying something to the affect that you weren't a fan of the E.R.A. It was something that I sorta remembered and didn't bother to look back. I think I have enough Blog-Cred not to be thought of some troll or someone that tries to put words in your mouth.
And yes Randy Johnson sucked in 06. But not everyone with 17 victories is an aberation. I would say the vast majority of 17-game winners have very good years not bad years like RJ. Randy Johnson probably had one of the worst 17-game victory seasons of all time, and for you to use that as the Bible of why wins are overrated isn't fair.
As a matter of fact, all 18-game winners last season (10) had ERA's under 4.00. Is that a coincidence or did all 10 have good seasons? Yes run support plays a role and Clemens had an amazing year with only a few victories a few years ago, but thats the exception not the norm.
I saw the 60 Minutes piece on Bill James. First off James said that closer are useless. Well the Red Sucks went with no closer in 2003 and it didn't work out. They went out and sign Keith Forke in the off-season and went on to win the World Series in 2004. So that theory is out the window. And secondly, James has not factor in stats the were inflamed by players taking steriods. Has James factor that in yet? I Doubt it.
Plus James said there's no such thing as clutch hitting. A lot of what he says is useful, you really need to pick and choose and not look at him as some baseball savior. I think he even said it doesn't matter what the batting order is! Though I'm not sure. And if you put anyone besides Manny behind Ortiz, Ortiz would not be the player he is.
Richie G., my apologies on my wording. You deserved better than that.
Obviously, there is SOME correlation between victories and a pitcher's quality. But, given all of the statistics we have, it's low on the list.
Yes, as you acknowledged, an 18-game winner is more likely than have not to have been a very good pitcher. But that doesn't mean those are the top 10 pitchers in baseball.
Here are some examples just from last year: Tim Wakefield went 17-12 with a 4.76 ERA. Matt Cain went 7-16 with a 3.65 ERA. Wakefield pitched for the World Series-winning Red Sox, Cain pitched for the awful Giants. Switch their teams, and their records might have been reversed.
Johan Santana went just 15-13 with a 3.33 ERA for the offensively-challenged Twins. On the Red Sox, he would've won 20, without question.
Gil Meche went 9-13 with a 3.67 ERA in 34 starts for the lousy Royals.
And then, when you take the conversation and discuss an entire career, it's criminal that Don Sutton (324 victories, 108 ERA+, 3574 strikeouts) and Phil Niekro (318 wins, 115, 3342 strikeouts) are in the Hall of Fame and Bert Blyleven (287, 118, 3701) isn't. Blyleven is clearly superior to that pair. ERA+ incorporates ballpark factors.
I apologize again, Richie.
Dennis, I agree that James whiffed on the closer issues. But he has been right on far, far more issues than he has been wrong. No one has figured how to to integrate steroid usage into statitstical analysis. I'm not sure why you're counting that as a strike against James, specifically.
No worries Ken. I wasn't angry until you mentioned Matt Cain and how he ruined my fantasy baseball season last year. But I told my friend I cant drop him because everygame he pitches great. Then Opening Day he pitches 5 1/3 scoreless and doesn't get the W. Or something like that.
I think I probably overrate the W and you probably underrate it a little. But again, no biggee.