True or False: Tigers offense

False

If both lineups were healthy, yes. But Damon, Matsui and Giambi have a very good chance of totally falling apart, as compared to only Sheff for the Tigers. Otherwise, I'd take the Yanks and their OBP.

by demondeaconsbaseball on Apr 1, 2008 10:06 AM EDT 0 recs

false

i think Detroit has the best offense.... Cleveland may be close though...

by daveh33 on Apr 1, 2008 4:56 PM EDT 0 recs

false if both lineups

are healthy. I hate to play Solomon but the Tigers are probably stronger against LH pitching while the Yankees have an edge against RH pitching. I think the Yankees will show their age a little more and both have some players who will come back to norms. I like daveh33's thoughts about the tribe offense but as an Indian fan I only wish it were true. Cleveland just doesn't have the powerhouse middle of the order of the Yankees and Tigers or even the Red Sox or Angels have.

by sdtribefan on Apr 1, 2008 8:34 PM EDT 0 recs

agreed

I think people look at balance too much and forget how critical the middle of the order power is. Look at what ARod has meant to the Yankees, Papi & Manny for BoSox, and Bonds previously for SanFran. They made solid (or worse) hitting teams into elite.

by pedrophile on Apr 1, 2008 8:57 PM EDT up 0 recs

I think you hit the nail on the head.

Cleveland has seven players with reasonable chances of 20-25 HRs but only one, Hafner, has the potential to go over 30. Even with aging considerations, the Yankees and Tigers have more players with 30 HR potential and still have the same lineup depth. Injuries probably wouldn't cause Cleveland to decline significantly but that is another issue.

by sdtribefan on Apr 1, 2008 11:34 PM EDT up 0 recs

Hello sdtribefan and pedrophile,

I can understand your argument for the Tiger offense being better, but believe it or not, PECOTA projects the Indians and Tigers' offenses to produce about the same (within a few runs or so.) The main reason why is because PECOTA is projecting significant declines in production from guys like Ordonez (56 runs to be exact,) Granderson (40 runs,) and Renteria (30 runs.)

I don't remember the exact differential between the two offenses (it was mentioned in one of the relatively recent threads on LetsGoTribe,) but you can read some of the reasoning behind PECOTA's projections under Jay's "Why We'll Win" column on the main page of LetsGoTribe.

In addition to PECOTA, the BABIPs many of the Tigers achieved in 2007 were above their career averages. In addition, many of the Tigers are on the "wrong side" of 30; even though Cabrera is well under 30, many of his teammates are not, and it's doubtful Cabrera can make up all the potential lost (due to injury) or diminished (if they stay healthy, but age catches up to them) production on his own, even with a great season.

Conversely, most, if not all, of the Indians are on the "right side" of 30, and as you alluded to, might not be affected as much by an injury or ineffectiveness to one of their middle-order hitters as the Tigers or Yankees may be to one of theirs (though Victor's loss for any extended period of time would likely be felt.) Just look to last season when I think the Indians finished 6th or 7th in the AL in runs scored (may be wrong on the exact ranking,) yet got a sub-par year from Hafner and virtually no production from LF (Dellucci out almost the whole season and Michaels and Lofton not driving in many runs.)

Even if the Indians' offense doesn't match the Tigers' pure firepower, I still like their chances of repeating in the Central for two main reasons: Better pitching and better depth. The Indians' pitching is arguably considerably better than the Tigers from the rotation to the bullpen. And, unlike the Tigers, the Indians have reinforcements preparing and/or even ready at AA and AAA (Mastny, Sowers, Laffey are ready now; you also have Miller, Slocum, Santos, Stevens, S. Lewis, and Lofgren, with possibilities also exisiting in Tony Sipp and J.D. Martin.)

And, as we all know, it takes more than a dynamite offense to win a championship. The mid-90s Indians, among others, are proof of that, and in those days, the AL Central was not as tough a division as it is today - the Royals, Twins, and White Sox of today are better than their counterparts in those days.

That's why even if the Tigers' lineup is a bit better (and I emphasize "bit" because I don't think the offensive disparity will be as great as you're implying,) I still think the Indians are the better team and will finish ahead of the Tigers in the AL Central at season's end.

Just my 2 cents - no offense.

Take care and have a great day!

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Apr 2, 2008 1:21 AM EDT up 0 recs

Hello again sdtribefan and pedrophile,

I found how much PECOTA is projecting the offensive differences to be between the Indians and Tigers' offenses for 2008 - it's under Jay's "Why We'll Lose" section on the front page of LetsGoTribe - 15 runs more for the Tigers' offense.

Admittedly, that's if the Tigers have key players fall to injury; if they do stay healthy (which is a sizable if, being that most of them are over 30 and some have had injury concerns in the past,) then chances are, the offense will probably be greater than the Indians, though I still think it will be relatively closer than most are thinking due to the disparity in "pure power" of the two offenses - perhaps within 50 runs or so. The power numbers may be more disparate, but I think the run production will be closer than one might think when looking at the two lineups.

And, the other points about pitching and depth still apply in regards to who I think will win the AL Central. :-)

Just my 2 cents - no offense.

Take care and have a great day!

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Apr 2, 2008 1:31 AM EDT up 0 recs

You already know my opinion of Jay at LetsGoTribe, indiansfan.

He is the reason I don't spend anytime on the site. When the site moderator is that lame and butchers the English language so badly, it is difficult to take anything seriously. I think we can all agree that the health issue could hurt the Tigers but you cannot assume such a thing. In order for the Indians to really be competitive with the Detroit lineup, regardless of what Pecota calculates, Cleveland would have to have major improvement from Hafner and Sizemore, an upgrade from Peralta and breakout power from Gutz and Garko. I happen to agree about the pitching (and defense) but this is about offense and, to give Dumbrowski his due, the Tigers probably have the best starting nine offensively in the AL given a healthy lineup.

by sdtribefan on Apr 2, 2008 7:30 AM EDT up 0 recs

My feeling

I think we can all agree that the health issue could hurt the Tigers but you cannot assume such a thing.

I actually think this is backwards. Every team should assume that a certain amount of its lineup will spend significant time on the DL, and (if possible) build for that eventually. This is especially true for a team like the Tigers, which has an old and injury-prone lineup.

Of course, this cuts both ways. The Indians (as evidenced by the fact that Martinez has already gone down for an indeterminate amount of time two days in the season) also need to worry about this. The difference is that, with the Indians' younger lineup, it is less likely that their team could see mass injuries.

All of that said, while it is possible that the Indians will outscore the Tigers, I wouldn't bet on it. If they do, they'll win the division in a walk. If they don't, it'll probably be a dogfight to the end.

I'd say, as it stands, two, possibly three teams look likely to outscore the Indians. There's only one that's a good bet to outscore the Tigers. But let's not lose our heads: the Tigers have an old lineup that overperformed last year.

Where Anne hath a will, Anne Hathaway.

by woodstein52 on Apr 2, 2008 12:04 PM EDT up 0 recs

Hello sdtribefan,

I can understand your point about the Tigers' offense - I think they do have more pure power than the Indians do, but as woodstein52 mentioned, I don't think you can just presume they're all going to remain healthy over the course of an entire season. I don't think you can do that with the Indians' lineup either, even though they'd be the better bet to stay healthy over the course of an entire season, being that ALL of them are under 30-YO.

You mention what the Indians would have to do to "compete" with the Tigers' lineup - hopefully, Hafner does get back up to 30+ HRs like he's done in the past, so I don't think an improvement from him is out of the question. Grady hitting 30+ HRs isn't out of the question either, though unlike Hafner, he hasn't hit 30+ HRs in the past (28 was his high in 2006.)

Regarding Peralta, if he hits around 25 HRs again (hit 21 in 2007 and 24 in 2005,) the Indians' offense would likely be in good shape, and likely would outproduce the power Renteria will likely provide.

As for Gutierrez and Garko, they're probably the biggest question marks, but 20-25 HRs wouldn't be out of the question for either of them, especially Garko, who hit 21 HRs in 484 ABs in 2007. Gutierrez himself hit 13 HRs in just 271 ABs in 2007, so projecting him to hit 20-25 HRs in 450-500 ABs in 2008 isn't far-fetched in my opinion.

Like I said, the Tigers' offense has more pure power and will likely hit more HRs (20-30 more or so,) but in terms of actual run production, I think the two offenses will be much closer than you seem to imply.

I know there are several who think the Tigers are the pick to win the AL Central because of that great offense (I'm not sure you and pedrophile were among them, though,) but it's important to keep in mind that it takes more than a great offense to win a division title and be a great playoff team. As mentioned above, I think the Indians have the advantage in both pitching and in depth (to help offset those injuries that usually come around during a season,) which is why I think the Indians have a bit of an edge in repeating as AL Central Division champions. I think the race will be close (within 5 games) to maybe relatively close (within 10 games,) but I think the Indians are still the team to beat in the Central, NOT the Tigers, even with their improved offense.

Just my 2 cents - no offense. :-)

Take care and have a great day!

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Apr 2, 2008 4:58 PM EDT up 0 recs

some thoughts

First of all I'm not one of those that adds up runs or hr's and think that is very indicative.

I believe it's very important to have a few big bats that not only hit hr's but are very good hitters. These types of hitters are huge when it comes to facing quality pitching. Many mistake hitters disappear in the playoffs. That is why Manny/Papi are huge for Boston. Obviously you don't want to rely on one big hitter though.

But Detroit has Ordonez, Sheff, Miggy that all have good power and can all hit pitchers pitches.

I only compared Sheff and his injuries with Hafner because I think Sheff is already discounted because of his lower numbers. He will miss some time but always produces. Hafner always gets those elbow problems and wasn't so quick with the bat last year. Is he slowing down or is his elbows even worse? I'd be very concerned. I put them at even for this year.

I don't like the 1-9 approach and think Miggy's impact is under-rated. When Miggy moves to the cleanup spot everyone moves down. Not just that. He is a hitter that is feared. Obviously he'll knock in a lot of runs. But he gets on base so much and combined with Sheff there will be lots of guys on base. The bottom half of the lineup can improve a ton if they always have guys on (unless they are stiffs). They will see more fastballs and should improve.

The 1-9 approach is fine for not relying on each other. But there isn't any fear. It doesn't put as much pressure on the staff IMO.

by pedrophile on Apr 3, 2008 8:59 PM EDT up 0 recs

False

The Yankees lineup will be average next year. Large drops of production from every player except for Abreu and Cano.

But I don't like the Tigers offense because, despite Cabrera, Polanco and Ordonez as well as Sheffield and Granderson will drop off offensively. So the production as a whole will be unaffected.

It's simple: Polanco doesn't hit like that consistantly, same with Ordonez. Sheffield is old and Granderson cannot hit the lefites. AT ALL.

The best offense in baseball will be the Brewers, who will not make the playoffs.

by METSMETSMETS on Apr 1, 2008 9:02 PM EDT 0 recs

True

The Tigers have some serious injury risks (Guillen and Sheffield), some strong regression candidates (Curtis Granderson ain't tripling 20 times this year, Polanco will not be batting .340, Renteria has always been erratic and is past 30, there's no way Magglio Ordonez wins another batting title), and significant holes at catcher and left field. The addition of Cabrera will prove to be a wash with these things, and the Yankees will outscore them again.

Where Anne hath a will, Anne Hathaway.

by woodstein52 on Apr 1, 2008 11:07 PM EDT 0 recs

Yankees will outscore them

and everybody else, just like they always do. They led the league in runs by a significant margin last season, despite getting no production from first base, with a banged up Damon, and Abreu and Cano getting off to horrendous starts. Granted, Posada had a career year and is due to regress, but I see no reason why, barring injury, the Yanks shouldn't score the most runs again.

http://mvn.com/milb-yankees/

by lemonjello on Apr 1, 2008 11:35 PM EDT 0 recs

indians and tigers

Hi IndiansFan!

While I agree the Tigers are older there are many double standards being applied here.

Sheffield is being listed for his age and injury prone. Sure, that's true. But his numbers were much worse last year specifically because he was playing hurt. I could easily see him having a bounce back huge season. And I could see him being hurt a lot. But what is realistic is duplicating last season.

What about Hafner? The Indians count on him more. He has had elbow injuries. He struggled last year. He is an equal risk.

Granderson is talked about for regression. Why not Grady? Why not Peralta? Or others?

Mags is mentioned as having a huge decline in 08. I don't buy that. This is blind stats talking. He did put up a career year and should decline. But he has put up many huge years in the past. He was hurt for a couple years and last year he was huge in the first half before tiring. Mags is a top notch OF.

Renteria had one year in the AL. All this talk about him being an NL only guy because of that is way premature.

Guillen is mentioned as an injury risk. That is crazy! He was moved from SS and as such should be much LESS of an injury risk than before. And possibly better numbers.

Pudge - will hit better this year. Best years behind him though.

Miggy - he is such a huge addition I can't believe the lack of love. Adding someone like him is crazy good.

by pedrophile on Apr 2, 2008 11:42 PM EDT 0 recs

indians

oh, and the indians.

I won't break them all down. But suffice it to say that Cleveland will have players improve and some decline. They may have less injury risk. They'll need it! When you totally rely on the big power bat in the middle it kills the team when hurt. Cleveland is less able to sustain an injury because of less firepower. Both Hafner and Victor have not been the most healthy either.

Cleveland has a good young team. And much better pitching. But their hitting isn't that close to Detroit.

ps: Either Toronto or Cleveland should have gone hard for Bonds. Toronto would have been the best fit.

by pedrophile on Apr 2, 2008 11:45 PM EDT up 0 recs

Hey pedrophile,

Just when your posts were looking so good you have to go and say something about the Indians going after Barry Bonds!! What an incredible match! The Indians really need a 40+ OF who cannot field or run, is under indictment, a clubhouse cancer, prima donna extraordinaire and cannot hit as well as their current DH. Somehow, I cannot see Shapiro calling you soon for roster advice.

I also think you have it backwards about Cleveland's ability to cover itself in the event of injuries versus Detroit. IMHO, that is their greatest strength and was directly responsible for their record last year. Who can Detroit bring up to replace an injury that isn't offensively limited? Of all the AL contenders, only Boston is likely to improve from their organization as much as Cleveland has the potential to improve from theirs.

On the other hand, I think your appraisal of Cleveland's youth, pitching and comparison to Detroit's hitting is quite accurate. You shoulda stopped there!

by sdtribefan on Apr 3, 2008 2:46 AM EDT up 0 recs

well

for Bonds it was a big if because of Hafner. If Hafner could play 1B, which he can't, any team can get over all these clubhouse things for one year to win a WS. Remember much of the negative media is just that. Media. They need to make money. Players don't hate him as much as the press would have it. They just don't like him either.

Notice how all the negative media ramped up around the steroids scandal but also was timed with SF being horrible. On a winning team everything changes.

As for covering for injuries - yeah, Cleveland has more. But they don't have the depth of top hitters. If Hafner didn't have such an off-year Cleveland would have won a WS. Well, maybe. But losing a Hafner or Sizemore would kill them. Detroit has so many more bats they can suffer it for a while. Same with NY. That is what I'm talking about.

by pedrophile on Apr 3, 2008 9:06 PM EDT up 0 recs

Hello pedrophile,

No offense, but while Hafner's drop-off didn't help, there was more to the Indians not winning a WS, and specificially, not beating Boston in the ALCS, than Hafner's hitting. Neither Sabathia nor Carmona pitched like they were capable of in that series against the ALCS (Sabathia was close in Game 5 against Beckett, but arguably could have been a little better.)

While I'm not confident in Hafner's ability to bounce back to his old self, there was more to the Indians failing to win the WS than Hafner's inability to hit like his old self in 2007.

And, no offense, the Indians' pitching is arguably more able to win low-scoring games if need be, whereas Detroit's pitching might lead to more slugfests where that offense will likely HAVE to outslug their opponents to win. Outside of Verlander, I'm not sure the rest of the rotation will be able to consistently keep opponents from scoring 4+ runs a game (Bonderman and Rogers will have some outings, and probably Robertson as well, but can they do it consistently in 90% of their starts? I have my doubts.)

Their bullpen is also a major question mark, so in essence, I think the Tigers' offense has to remain high-scoring for them to be competitive, and like I said before, their age could be a major detriment to them in terms of injuries and any loss of bat speed.

No offense, but when you mention Hafner or Sizemore, I think Martinez might be the best, most consistent bat of the three. He'd also have to be considered a "top" bat.

Therefore, the Indians have at least 3 "top" bats. On the Tigers, you have Sheffield, Ordonez, and Cabrera. If you want to include guys like Guillen, Granderson, Renteria, and Inge, then I think you have to include comparable guys like Peralta (especially,) and to a lesser extent, Garko (due to only doing it one year to this point) and Blake, so I really don't see this wide disparity in "top" bats that you are seeing. In addition, Gutierrez might emerge into the quality of bat like a Garko or even a Peralta over the course of a whole season. At most, I might see the Tigers having one more "top" bat if you want to include all those hitters, but I don't think the Indians' offense will be that much more crippled by losing a Sizemore, Martinez, or Hafner as the Tigers would losing a Sheffield, Ordonez, or Cabrera.

Plus, I'm not worried about the power so much; the mid- to late-90s Indians teams could mash as well as the '08 Tigers projectably can, but it takes more than outslugging your opponents to make the postseason when the division is the quality it is now as compared to what it was back in the mid- to late-90s. And as mentioned, the Indians' pitching I think is more capable of keeping opposing offenses down than the Tigers' pitching is, especially since Bonderman doesn't seem to be the same, and no Zumaya or Rodney in the bullpen.

Just my 2 cents - no offense. :-)

Take care and have a great day!

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Apr 4, 2008 11:48 PM EDT up 0 recs

Hi IndiansFan

I would disagree with Sizemore being a top bat. Hmmm. I guess in some ways he definitely is. But with the k's I just seeing top playoff pitching making him less of a feared hitter.

I would compare Granderson to Sizemore. I think they are very similar. Victor I'm not so sure about, just haven't seen him enough to have a strong opinion either way. I know he puts up the numbers.

Agreed about the Tigers pen.

btw - do you remember our discussion on Carmona? I remember how many others, not you, freaked about my suggestion of the extra inning jump having it's toll. And sure enough he was bad in the Sox series. He had the velocity. But everyone knows, or should, that control is the first thing to go. And what happened was a total lack of control for him and Sabathia.

As for this year I expected a good start for Carmona. If there is any lasting ill effects from the innings bumped we will see it at the end of this season or possibly in a few years time (from the attrition).

by pedrophile on Apr 5, 2008 1:02 AM EDT up 0 recs

Hi indiansfan ande pedrophile,

Please don't take it personally, old buddy, but I really have to go with pedrophile on this one (and I was one of the ones who thought his comments on Carmona was speculative rambling by trying to apply generalities to specific individuals). In this case, I suggest you try going position by position to see which offensive lineup is more potent.

Here is how I look at it and you and pedrophile can both disagree if you like. Catcher is clear advantage Cleveland. 1B is a general push, maybe slightly Detroit. 2B is clearly Detroit. SS is a tossup in my opinion. 3B is Detroit by miles. LF is clearly Detroit. CF is about equal and RF is clearly Detroit. I am going with Cleveland on DH but that is not clearcut.

I think pedrophile is wrong when he thinks that injured big bats are easier replaced in a big bopper lineup than replacing a 1-9 type of lineup. To me, that is bassackward but who can prove either. I think he is right about Sizemore/Granderson. Sizemore hits LHs a little better and is probably superior defensively by an equally small margin. Otherwise, they are the same player.

I still think his specualtions about Carmona's arm trouble are pointless rambling. Using Carmona's first start as proof of anything is even less indicative than calling Detroit the worst team in baseball because of its 0-5 start. Everyone will think you are a genius if you are right but only a select few, including me, will remember if you are wrong. BTW, I didn't freak. I told you that the logic of applying general statistics to a specific player or players without considering the individual(s) involved was flawed thinking. If freaking out is what you took out of my posts then I suggest you cast my writing in a manner to make it palatable to you. Maybe it was not possible for you to learn from the exchange, but it appears it had no effect.

Lastly, I happen to agree with indiansfan about the Detroit starting pitching. I took an awful lot of heat because I believed that Detoit's trades, including the Cabrera trade, were a mistake both short term and long term. I still don't think Cabrera's offense makes up for the defensive shortcomings and pitching depth but time will tell who's right.

Just my 3 cents-no offense. :-)

by sdtribefan on Apr 5, 2008 9:58 PM EDT up 0 recs

Carmona

I think his first game or first month tells us nothing. I'm right with you there. If you read my last post you'll see that I think it won't affect him until later in the season or a few more years into his career. If at all. It is something to be worried about though. Same goes for Sabathia. But since I don't think Cleveland will sign him no worry no cry.

As far as the big bopper? I don't think we will agree on this one. I do know when a team has 2 big boppers and one gets hurt there is a lot of pressure on the other. Many times a hitter has a poor season because of this. Not always of course. But I think you get where I'm coming from.

I'm with you on the position by position analysis.

I'm ok with what Detroit did in the off-season except for one thing. Their pen. Cleveland doesn't have the best pen. But their starters can go deep. Detroits less so. They need the pen more.

Rodney is a stud when healthy. Which is never. Zoolander is awesome but missing the first half. Jones gives up a lot of runs but typically closes the game. It's the two guys before him they are missing. This will be huge for them.

Cleveland has Betancourt which is nice. Who is their other setup man?

I do think it will be a close race. At times Detroit will bludgeon teams and will have some awesome winning streaks. Cleveland should have very rare losing streaks because of the pitching.

by pedrophile on Apr 5, 2008 11:06 PM EDT up 0 recs

I think we have reached our common ground

and areas of disagreement. All I am saying about Carmona is that he doesn't fit a statistical profile even if one could be gleaned from these numbers. And any dropoff down the road could be from playing field hockey in the shower or from excess innings. Who is to say that those included in your statistical base did not have some other problem? BTW, it is a logical assumption that those who pitched the most innings would most likely be injured assuming a random allocation of injuries. But, is it true?

I can live with the big bopper difference!

Even with the relative inexperience, I like the look of both Perez and Lewis. I would go so far as to consider either could be the next Cleveland closer. Jones and Borowski are like Granderson and Sizemore. Potato/Tomato! Bullpens are like assholes, you gotta have one or die!

I picked Cleveland for the Central and Detroit for the wild card. Over the long season, I expect Detroit's offense and Cleveland's pitching will offset each other to some degree, as yet undetermined. The difference to me is defense and depth and I give that advantage to the Tribe.

by sdtribefan on Apr 6, 2008 3:48 AM EDT up 0 recs

lol

{playing field hockey in the shower} I've never heard it called that before but i guess it's possible he pulls a muscle doing this, lol.

I think injuries come in two types. Trauma and attrition. The large number and jump in innings has a possible risk of attrition. It also has more risk of trauma but for Carmona I don't see it - he rarely had very high pitch counts and didn't go on short rest. IMO he is a risk from attrition but not trauma.

by pedrophile on Apr 6, 2008 9:50 AM EDT up 0 recs

You know, I agree with a lot of what you say, pedrophile.

Let me tell you where we disagree. While I think you are absolutely correct about Hafner's injuries, I think Sheffield's have been worse. I also think it is more likely for Hafner to repeat or improve at his age than it is for Sheffield at this but who can say for sure.

I don't know who is talking about Granderson regression. I think it likely the will improve by seeing even more RH pitching because the rest of Detroit's lineup hits LHs so well. I don't think Grady or Peralta are likely candidates either but, as you say, who knows.

Ordonez is an offensive force who probably will not duplicate last year but, in the absence of injury, is probably good for his average year. Do not confuse this with being a top notch OF. He is not.

I agree about Renteria's offense. However, he is incredibly range challenged at SS no matter what league he is in.

I am not sure Guillen's injury risk is changed significantly by the position change. Do you have some stats to support the conclusion?

Pudge is a has been. Miguel Cabrera is an offensive force in any league. Until shown otherwise, I think you will have to agree that he is also a HUGE defensive liability and may have some attitude issues. That might help explain the lack of love you perceive.

by sdtribefan on Apr 3, 2008 3:11 AM EDT up 0 recs

to clarify

Hafner is less of an injury risk. Agreed. And much more valuable long term, agreed.

He is more critical to the team though making his risk more substantial to the team.

I'm also concerned with him. It wasn't the same swing. I'm not sure if it was a hitch or just slower bat speed. I'm concerned his elbow might be part of the problem last year. It wasn't so much a bad year as a totally different hitter last year. Good but nothing special.

I mention Grandy & Grady because someone mentioned Grandy regressing. I just stated both could regress. I doubt either does. They are both very good.

I mentioned Peralta because Ordonez was mentioned as having a huge regression. Ordonez WILL regress. I do see him as a top OF. I think 315 avg, 390 OBP 25 bombs 50 doubles. Good slugging. And can hit the ball the other way against top pitchers.

Defence for Renteria or Miggy? That's another discussion. We both know Cleveland has the better D and pitching.

I don't think there are any stats regarding Guillen. I just think he will get less nagging injuries. And he is the type to play through them and it hurts his numbers. Some players, Ricky Henderson, would never play through them and kept the good numbers. I think Guillen will be helped.

But - I'm just mentioning this to say he will not have a regression. Or should I say, is not likely to have a regression.

Pudge - yeah. But I think one last hurrah might happen this year. I don't see worse that's for sure.

Miggy - will get an awful lot of love when you see him get key hits in clutch situations. Some here would have you believe clutch is a myth. I've played in pressure situations and choked enough times to tell you it's not ;)

by pedrophile on Apr 3, 2008 9:16 PM EDT up 0 recs

Hello pedrophile,

I appreciate your thoughts and analysis, but respectfully disagree with a few points.

One - Sheffield and Hafner are NOT equal in terms of injury risk - Sheffield is definitely more of an injury risk, as Sheffield is 39-YO, Hafner is 30-YO.

I think Hafner is still a risk of not bouncing back to his 2006-form, which could have been a career year for him, but I still think he could bounce back close to his 2004-2005 numbers, being that he is only 30-YO. One does have to wonder though how long Sheffield can remain productive - I could see another season or two out of Sheffield, perhaps, but sooner or later, his age likely will catch up to him.

And, injuries have been more of a factor in recent years, both with the shoulder and with the wrist (I believe.) Therefore, I still give a slight edge to Pronk for being likelier to stay healthy and produce closer to what one would expect.

Reading more about Jay's explanation about PECOTA's projections on LGT's front page, PECOTA is suggesting that Grady's .333 BABIP is actually below his career BABIP average, so he was actually a bit unlucky last season when it comes to the balls he put into play.

PECOTA doesn't think that Granderson's production "rate" will fall off much, as he is only 27, but Grady is only 25, plus has had three full seasons to Granderson's two, which may be why they're giving Grady a bit of an advantage over Granderson in terms of production. I'm guessing PECOTA also thinks Grady can reduce his strikeouts a bit more and consistently handle lefties better. Only time will tell, but I don't think Sizemore is a guaranteed candidate for a dropoff - he actually had higher BAs and SLGs in 2005 and 2006 (.289/.484 and .290/.533 respectively, as compared to .277/.462 last season,) so I think a bit higher BA and SLG wouldn't be out of the question.

As for Peralta, he's had two good seasons and one poor season, but again, he'll only be 26 in May, which again, is younger than Granderson. Plus, his approach to be more selective and go the other way consistently seems legitimate, as early on in 2008, he looks more like the hitter from 2005 and 2007, not the hitter from 2006. Of course, only time will tell as well, but being that Peralta maintained that good hitting approach throughout 2007 after struggling through 2006, I think there's a good chance he can maintain that good approach and put up comparable or even slightly better numbers in 2008.

Regarding Ordonez, I too was surprised that PECOTA projected him to drop so much in production - perhaps it's the age (34) and the injury history - but as you mentioned, I'm not sure you can expect him to repeat his 2007 performance, so a bit of a dropoff in production wouldn't be surprising (though I don't think it will be 56 runs either.)

I also don't think Renteria's season in Boston was indicative of his true offensive ability; I think he was trying too hard to live up to that trade, but even so, I still think he'll have a hard time matching Peralta's power and overall offensive numbers, especially being that Renteria is 32-YO and Comerica Park isn't the hitter's park Progressive Field is (though it's not the hitter's park it once was back in the mid- to late-90s either - it's considered more neutral or a very slight hitter's park, especially in the summer months when the south wind is blowing out of the ballpark.)

Rodriguez - I'm not so sure on his offense. I'll be very surprised if he shows the power he did in Spring Training though. A bit of a bounceback, perhaps, though I still think he might be likelier to hit .280 than .300+ now, especially with that poor BB/K ratio. I also don't expect him to hit more than around 11-12 HRs like he did last season either, so I think that offensive bounceback is not a sure thing.

As for Cabrera, he'll certainly help their offense, but he's only one player - he can only do so much. And, as mentioned, outside of him and Granderson, the rest of that lineup is over 30, and greatly over 30 in many cases (Sheffield - 39; Ordonez - 34; Rodriguez - 36; Renteria - 32; Polanco - 32; Guillen - 32.)

If the rest or part of the rest of the lineup either slows down a bit or is injured for part of the time, that will eat up some of Miggy's increased production. Therefore, it's not the fact that people don't like or "love" Miggy and his production; it's the increasing probability that some or the rest of his teammates will either not perform up to their past standards and/or will miss some significant time, taking away some of the added production Miggy brings to that lineup, which may be why they're thinking the Tigers' offense will improve a bit, but not as much as one might think when you hear the fact Cabrera was added to that lineup.

As for the Indians, I don't agree with this statement:

"When you totally rely on the big power bat in the middle it kills the team when hurt. Cleveland is less able to sustain an injury because of less firepower. Both Hafner and Victor have not been the most healthy either."

No offense, but that might be one of the main advantages of Cleveland's offense - what Manager Eric Wedge calls their "1-9" approach. They don't solely rely on one "big power bat" to produce their offense. As sdtribefan mentioned, the Indians probably have around 7 players or so who could hit 20-25 HRs, and probably 2-3 players who could hit .300+ - they are certainly not a "1-power bat" offense.

For instance, even with Pronk's "poor" showing and virtually no production from LF, the Indians still scored 811 runs, good for 6th in the AL. Even if some of the players drop off (and keep in mind that some of those early ABs went to Trot Nixon, Josh Barfield, and Andy Marte,) if Hafner and Dellucci produce closer to their career norms and a few players improve a bit from 2007, an increase in run production in 2008 would seem like a strong possibility.

Regarding Bonds, I don't think the Indians would have ever gone for that for several reasons:

1. Bonds would likely not fit in the clubhouse - the Indians weren't fond of Bradley's surly personality - it's unlikely Bonds would have been accepted any better by Indians' management, not especially with all the young players in the Indians' clubhouse.

2. Where would Bonds fit in the lineup? His defense in LF is below-average at best now (worse than Dellucci's,) and Pronk needs to DH because of his arthritic elbow. Bonds would not have fit well here.

3. Bonds' bat seems to show some signs of slowing down, and he is 42-YO. Combine that with the fact he'd be going to a new league, one he has never played regularly, and I think it would take him a while to make his signing worth it, as he'd also cost more money than the Indians would want to give out for one player of that age and questionable behavior.

Overall, as mentioned, I think the Tigers will hit more HRs (around 20-30 more,) but in terms of run production, I think the Indians and Tigers will be relatively close to each other at season's end - say around 50 runs or so.

Just my 2 cents - no offense.

Again, appreciate your thoughts - we'll see at year's end where the Indians and Tigers stand, offensively, and overall! :-)

Take care and have a great day!

The "cream of the crop" doesn't always rise to the top.

by indiansfan on Apr 3, 2008 1:03 AM EDT 0 recs