Lost in the Red Sox’s collapse was how well Adrian Gonzalez did on the Red Sox. Even more lost was how devastated the Padres were without him. Let us not forget, this was the team dominating the NL West for most of the season just a year prior. In 2011 however:
Houston Street, Yonder Alonso, John Baker, Andrew Cashner, Mark Kotsay, Micah Owings, Carlos Quentin, and Edison Volquez.
Heath Bell, Aaron Harang, Mat Latos, Wade LeBlanc, Pat Neshek, Chad Qualls, and Anthony Rizzo.
Why?: While it is true that there were more “notable” players added than were lost, this seems like one of those “quality over quantity” situations. In the aggregate, the quality level of the players lost was just that much higher than that of the players gained to merit a D+ as a grade for their offseason.
It appears, though that the additions have a lot of potential to be integral parts. Huston Street is coming from the park most associated with being hitter friendly to the one most recognized with being a pitcher friendly park, so that can only serve to help him, as far as his statistics are concerned. Andrew Cashner are more obvious in that they are just high-potnetial prospects that could or could not pan out for the Padres. Micah Owings is a sort of double-edged sword of potnetial. The first is that he has the potential to become a great pitcher, but he is probably better known for his hitting, so if he isn’t pitching that well…hey, Babe Ruth was once a pitcher. Both Carlos Quentin and Edison Volquez are great talents that actually have shown themselves to be great players. Now it may be tougher for Quentin to do so in the monstrousity that is PETCO Park, but anyone remember when it was said that the EdisonVolquez-Josh Hamilton deal was said to be a win-win, because Hamilton and Volquez were doing so well for their respective teams?
The reason, though, that I gave the Padres the grade I did is that all this potential is just that, potential. The guys they lost were more consistently proven than those they gained. So it is *possible* that the subtractions show this grade to be unsure, but as of now, the additions are enough worse than the subtractions (as a whole) to earn a D+ grade. For those of you who don’t know, a C means the team gained/lost no talent, a C+ would mean they made a slight addition to the talent of the previous year, and a C- would mean they lost a bit of talent-not to be confused with potential. So if a team traded Bryce Harper for someone like Jonny Gomes, and Bryce Harper was not going to play that year, the team would probably get a C+, because Harper would not have helped their team that year anyway, but Gomes could help the team in that year. Except it would be done for all of the team’s additions and subtractions.
Predicted Record Range: 70-75 wins. I realize that I have the talent on the team getting worse, but I have this feeling that they were a little unlucky and shouldn’t have lost as many games as they did.
What more can be said about the Cubs 2011 season than any other season:
Actually, this streak is so bad and long it deserves both a picture describing the Cubs’ 2011 season/last 103 years AND a video doing the same. Check it out:
Anthony Rizzo, David DeJesus, Paul Maholm, Andy Sonnanstine, Ian Stewart, Chris Volstad, and Kerry Wood.
Carlos Zambrano, Andrew Cashner, Tyler Colvin, Sean Marshall, Carlos Peña, Aramis Ramirez, and John Grabow.
Why?: First, I realize that the pictures I chose may not be the best ones to put up. I just really put up the most hyped transactions this offseason for the Cubs. Also, now that I realized I probably made a mistake, I don’t feel like pulling the pictures and putting new ones up.
Anyway, the common theme in my comments on Cubs fans’ MlBlogs was that I was glad for them that the Cubs finally decided to go into full rebuilding mode, because the “in-between” stage they have been in for the past few years has really been hurting them. So you may say, “Well, Mateo, then why do you have them at such a low grade in a D+ if you think they are actually doing a good job?” This is a valid question. The answer is that I did give the Cubs brownie points by bumping their grade up from a D (which is usually the protocol when I can’t give the team a high grade, but like the way they handled things). However, I couldn’t give the Cubs a legitimate grade, because the majority of what goes into it is how it improved the team for winning in 2012. The Cubs set themselves up well for the next few years, but I don’t know what planet you’d have to live on to think paying $15 million+ for Chris Volstad is helping the Cubs win in 2012.
There are other examples, but I think you get the gist of things.
Predicted Record Range: 62-67 wins