From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: *MY* predictions, because I feel like posting them.
Date: 6 Apr 92 16:56:44 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU

All right.  I'm sure you're ALL waiting eagerly to see my predictions,
so I'm going to post them.  First, the AL: 

AL East: Baltimore/Boston/Toronto/Detroit/Milwaukee/NY/Cleveland.

This division has a few good teams, but 3 of the worst teams in baseball.

Baltimore -- Why not?  They have no depth, but except for second base, they're 
	solid everywhere.  Good shortstop, too. :)  Good young pitching,
	and a really solid bullpen.  Probably the best in the division.

Boston -- Viola solves their main problem.  (Pitching, of course.)  They
	had decent pitching last year, and it has to get better with a
	lesser role for Matt Young.  Their offense with a full year of 
	Plantier, a rebound by Burks, and a lesser role for Brunansky ought 
	to be good, also.

Toronto -- Signing a 37 year old pitcher with a 4.20 ERA the last 3 years,
	ESPECIALLY when your weakness is offense, is really dumb.  Winfield &
	Bell will help some, but they have to make up for the decline of White
	and Carter which I expect.  Incidentally, WHY is Winfield labelled
	a winner by the mediots?  

Detroit -- Does this team have ANY pitching?  They got career years from
	Whitaker,Phillips,AND Tettleton.  It won't happen again.  Plus they
	signed Dan 'TWG' Gladden.

Milwaukee -- Only Molitor is really any good.  Yount is almost gone, and the
	rest of this team is bad.  Not much pitching after Bosio.  (Bill 
	Wegman?  Come on.)  This team has surprised me before, but I
	can't see them scoring any runs, and I *know* they have no pitching.

New York -- Thank goodness for Cleveland.  They seem to think they have lots 
	of talent.  They're wrong.  Tartabull, but he's fragile.  R. Kelly
	and Barfield are decent.  That's it.  Mattingly/Kelly/Gallego/Hayes
	has got to be the WORST infield in baseball.  Well, maybe California. 
	And their pitching?  TIM LEARY???? 

Cleveland -- They've got "lot's of young talent," according to the conventional
	wisdom.  Kenny Lofton?  He can't carry Cole's jock, although he's
	probably more likely to *catch* it. Whiten and Hill are *huge* 
	out-eaters.  Belle/Baerga/Sorrento are OK.  But their pitching is 
	the REAL joke.   They don't have any.  

AL West: Chicago/Minnesota/Seattle/Texas/Kansas City/Oakland/California

Chicago: Second the last 2 years, but their offense will improve this
	year (Bell and Sax will help some, Raines will have a better year,
	Thomas is young and improving [now *that's* scary]).  People
	complain about their pitching; I certainly don't see why it would be
	worse than last years, which was pretty good.

Minnesota: 2 weeks ago, I would have picked them lower.  But the acquisition 
	of Smiley solidifies the rotation and more than makes up for the loss
	of Morris. Replacing Gladden with Munoz will help A LOT.  Pagliarulo 
	won't have as good a year, nor will Chili Davis, but on the whole 
	I think these things will mostly balance, and Minnesota will be
	almost as good as last year.

Seattle: One of the top 2 or 3 outfields in baseball.  (The players, not
	the field itself.)  Buhner/Griffey/Mitchell (if all 3 are healthy) will
	create TONS of runs.  Tino Martinez/O'Brien isn't a great 1b/dh
	combo, but it isn't awful, and Edgar Martinez is one of the most
	underrated players in the league.  Really lousy catchers, though.  If
	Holman weren't hurt, and the M's were smart enough to use Salkeld, I'd
	pick them higher.

Texas: Great offense, assuming Franco's injury is short-term.  Very good
	offense even if it is longer, though.  Still would be near the top.
	If Tom House would just quit, this team could do well.  But who
	can they *count on* to stay healthy?  Only Ryan, and even he isn't
	certain.  If Witt, Brown, Guzman and Russell can stay healthy, this 
	team will do better, though.

Kansas City: They helped themselves a lot by adding Joyner, Jeffries, and even 
	the overrated McReynolds, but lost Tartabull and Gibson and are
	planning on playing Howard and Shumpert in the infield, and Keith
	Miller (!) in the outfield.  That's 3 outs right there.  And McRae eats
	bunches of outs himself.  The pitching is still pretty strong, even
	with the loss of Saberhagen.

Oakland: I'd pick them higher if I thought they'd use Ready and Broisus
	rather than Lansford and Bordick.  Canseco, Rickey, McGwire, Baines, 
	and even Dave Henderson will help create a lot of runs, though.  The 
	*real* problem is the, ahem, "pitching."  To have almost the worst
	ERA in the league in *Oakland*?  That takes talent.  And the rotation
	is OLD, so it isn't likely to improve.  So's the bullpen, for that 
	matter.  If they'd be willing to give Harris and Dressendorfer shots...

California:  Well, 3 really good pitchers (if Finley is healthy) and Harvey.  
	One of the worst infields in baseball (Stevens/Rose/DiSicarna/Gaetti) 
	Too many DHs -- Polonia/Brooks/Davis.  Hayes and Parrish, who had 
	miserable seasons, are old.  In short, not very much this year.

-- 
David M. Nieporent              |ALEast 92: 1.Baltimore 2.Boston 3.Toronto
niepornt@phoenix.princeton.edu  |4. Detroit 5.Milwaukee 6.NY 8.Cleveland
"Baseball stathead, and card-carrying member of the ACLU.  And proud of it."
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball