Roger Clemens, Roy Oswalt and Andy Pettitte comprise a great trio. But they did in the first half last year, too, en route to a sub-.500 record in late July. That would be BC: Before Carlos. If he checked his facts he would know that 1) Beltran wasn't the main reason for our late-season succes...he didnt show flashes of brilliance until the post-season... and 2)Pettite was injured the whole year as well as Miller... meaning Clemens and Oswalt had to do it themselves (until the arrival of Backe). His reasoning makes no sense..to put them so low and the cubs so high...and about a half dozen teams (Dbacks, Tigers, Mariners, etc) that are worse ahead of us... whatever.
#23 may be a little high, but i wouldn't go below #17. We never fully addresed our bullpen issues. It's weaker than the start of last year. Berkman will be and and Pettite might be out to start the season. Leaving Bagwell as our only slugger who is steadily declining. With no protection around him, i expect Bags not to see many pitches to hit. Then again, i can see why we are #23 to start the season w/o Berkman and most likely Pettite. Remeber, these rating are week to week, so when our guys return, we should climb up the ratings.
and so it begins.... it's alright, it's fun being the underdog. and just to say it that guy is an idiot, there is no intelligent argument that would justify putting the astros as the 23rd best team in baseball.
What do Morgan Ensberg and Raul Chavez have in common? Both of them had more RBI's in September than Carlos Beltran. As for protection for Bagwell, here's a bold prediction: Jason Lane will have 30 HR's and 100 RBI's this year.
Wow, this guys list is as bad as his team comments: 17 Chicago White Sox - The losses of Carlos Lee and Magglio Ordonez were heavy -- as are the extended injury woes of the Big Hurt -- but a veteran rotation keeps them in the mix. 18 Detroit Tigers - If this franchise makes as much improvement as it did a year ago, look out Minnesota. There are still too many injury questions, namely Scott Boras' bust-in-waiting Magglio Ordonez. Isn't this contradicting?
Why is this a total shock to you people? We have no offensive threat other than Berkman on this team. Pitching DOES win championships.....if you get to the short series that make up thye post season....then you can put together some 2-1, 3-2 , etc wins. You can't do it all season long. I think 23 is a bit low....but 19-20 isn't completely out of the question given what our opening day lineup looks like.
Why do people equate "decline" with "offensive zero"? Check the 2004 numbers for our two future Hall of Famers, and ask yourself if you can honestly say neither is an offensive threat. They *do* need lineup protection, but Ausmus they ain't.
I would rather have room to move up than no room to move up at all. How the Reds are ranked higher than the Astros though makes me laugh though. The Reds do not have any pitching and you know Griffey will get hurt sometime during the season.
Why? Maybe it has to do with our best hitter coming off of surgery....losing our top RBI to free agency....and losing one of the best all around players in the game. Say what you want about his stats in the regular season....he was part of the run that got us to the playoffs....and we probably don't make it without him......and we certainly dont win our first ever playoff series. In addition, Bags is NOT the hitter he used to be....especially when he is relying on Ensberg as protection. Bidge, while he had a good year last year is okay...but he isn't scaring anyone into pitching around him. Lane and Burke are unproven...regardless of how many people think Lane will hit 30 HR. Ausmus is Ausmus. Who knows....maybe the playoff run gave Bags and Bidge a second wind....and perhaps Ensberg will find it again.....maybe Burke and Lane turn out to be huge catalysts....but there are too many question marks to consider or lineup anything but suspect at best.
I see where you're coming from and I agree for the most part (write that one down). My point wasn't that we should be on the edge of our seats with expectation from this "power-packed" lineup, as I'm not either. My point was simply that Berkman is *not* the only offensive threat in this lineup (though he is the biggest): while they are not in their 94-99 form, Bagwell and Biggio still *do* comprise somewhat of a threat to an opposing pitcher--Ausmus they ain't.
and if you're gonna have one side the equation be a little less than the other, you want it to be the hitting...not the pitching. you can acquire a bat a lot easier than you can acquire an arm. for a lot cheaper, too. btw...beltran's impact on this team during their amazing regular season run last season is vastly overrated.
They're "threats" in that they're average at their position (which is really a testament to their skill level, given their age). Biggio is a middle-of-the-pack LF (and still an above average leadoff hitter) and an above average 2B, offensively. Bags is slightly above average at 1B. Both are offense-heavy positions, and we're not hurting offensively at either spot. Ausmus, like you said, is a well below average starting C from an offensive standpoint. What we're lacking are not average or pretty good players - I expect decent production out of Big, Bags, Lane, Burke, and Ensberg - we're lacking a bat that other teams fear, until Berkman comes back. Look at San Fran's lineup with and without Bonds, for example of how an impact player can change a whole lineup's production.
i disagree....he became a threat...regardless of production....every time he stepped up to bat....he gave bidge protection...and he made it so bags had a risp many times....he could turn a walk into a triple with a stolen base and a sac fly as good as anyone....i agree that he wasnt the big producer ...but he was certainly a major cog in the lineup down the stretch
a cog, yes. but that's not how he's sold, NJ. he's sold as the reason we made the playoffs. that's the label he got. he wasn't that. he wasn't sold as a threat that didn't come through...he was sold as THE MAN who conducted that huge comeback. didn't happen. if biggio or bagwell had only had 7 RBI's in September, we'd be hearing how worthless they were.
I think he was sold, moreso, as the guy who helped us win our first playoff series...the guy to get the monkey from Atlanta off of our back...and the guy who was a MAJOR piece of the puzzle that got us to within a few out of the WS. I think he was also sold as a guy, if given a full year in an Astros uniform, who could have an MVP caliber year and be a big reason why we compete for supremacy as the older guys start to fade.
I agree...Backe, Kent, Clemens and Bags were all producers....but I don't think any of those guys, Clemens included would meant as much to the team for the next few years as Beltran would have.
