What are the Cubs going to do in 2010? I can easily build a case that the Cubs will have a great, resurgent year. Unfortunately, I can just as easily build a case that 2010 will be as big of a disaster as 2009.
I’m normally a glass is half full kind of guy. If you look through the “glass-is-half-full” prism, you can see a talented Cubs team that just needs to get back to career averages in order to compete for the playoffs. In 2009, the Cubs received sub-par performances from Alfonso Soriano, Geovany Soto, and Mike Fontenot. All three should have comeback years.
Soriano may never be the 40-40 guy he once was, but there’s no reason to think he can’t be a productive hitter again. If you look at his career stats, 2009 was his worst year. I think it’s much more likely that he had a down year (along with an injury) than it is that he simply lost the ability to hit.
What is a career average for Soto? He had a very good rookie campaign in 2008 and a very bad year in 2009. But like Soriano, his bad year in 2009 was accompanied by an injury. Most people think the 2008 Soto is the real Soto. If he can get back to his 2008 form, all is good. If he can’t, the Cubs may be in the market for a catcher come 2011.
Fontenot probably won’t be as bad this year as he was last season, but the fact remains that he is not a legitimate MLB-quality second baseman. If the Cubs use him off the bench, he can probably contribute to the team. If they use him as a starter, even if he gets back to his career averages, he’s still not going to be good enough.
Milton Bradley also underperformed last year, but he’s gone, replaced by Marlon Byrd. What can we expect from Byrd? If he continues putting up the numbers he put up over the past three years in Texas, the Cubs should be fine.
Even with all of the underperforming, injuries, and distractions, the Cubs still somehow managed to win 83 games in 2009. Things should be better in 2010, right? I mean, the Cardinals still have the great hitting, but will their pitching be as good? I don’t think so. The Reds are better, but still not very good. The Brewers still don’t have much pitching. The Astros didn’t do anything to help themselves in the off season, and the Pirates are, well, still just the Pirates. Winning the NL Central should be a possibility for a Cubs team that should be better in 2010 than they were in 2009.
On the other hand, there’s an argument to be made that the Cubs are not contenders for the NL Central. With the Cardinals having Holliday and Pujols for the whole year, and with the Cards two best pitchers, Chris Carpenter and Adam Wainwright, back in 2010, St. Louis is the clear favorite to win the NL Central. To compete, or so the agrument goes, the Cubs will have to win 90 games in 2010 and they just don’t have a team that can do that.
Sure, Soriano may rebound, but he’s still a defensive liability. Soto’s had one good year and there’s no reason to believe he can repeat that performance. Fontenot, even at his best, won’t be much help. And there’s good reason to believe he won’t be at his best. What about Marlon Byrd? Many people feel he is nothing more than a 4th outfielder posing as a starting CF. The Cubs may not be as good in 2010 as they were in 2009. That means 2010 could be a disaster.
In addition to the offensive woes predicted by the naysayers, they point out that the Cubs starting rotation will not be as good in 2010 as it was in 2009. Carlos Zambrano may have a comeback year, but even that may mean just 15-16 wins. Ryan Dempster will likely regress and Ted Lilly isn’t even going to be around at the beginning of the year. Rich Harden is gone and it’s probably unrealistic to expect Randy Wells to have another year like he had last year. And with Harden gone and Lilly out to start the year, the Cubs are going to have to rely on guys like Carlos Silva, Tom Gorzelanny, and Sean Marshall. If they don’t perform better than expected, the Cubs are sunk.
So which is it? Will the Cubs be better in 2010 than they were in 2009, or will they be the same or worse? There are legitimate arguments on all sides of the issue.
I’m concerned about the Cubs starting rotation. Zambrano should be fine. As much as I like Dempster, I can never really trust him. I keep expecting him to blow up. Will he blow up in 2010?
Losing Lilly for the first month or two is going to hurt no matter what kind of happy face you put on it. Will Randy Wells prove to be a one-hit wonder or is he legit? Your guess is as good as mine. And what about Silva, Gorzelanny, Marshall, and Jeff Samardjzia? In order for the Cubs to be successful, some or all of these guys are going to have to perform much better than expected. That gives me an uneasy feeling.
On offense, I expect Soriano to make a comeback, Soto to do just so-so, and Fontenot to play below the level of a league average second baseman. Even if Jeff Baker gets the start at second base, I don’t think he offense will be much better than Fontenot’s. Byrd may have a decent year, but I don’t think he’ll be the run-producing number five hitter the Cubs want him to be.
All of this adds up to the Cubs being slightly better than they were in 2010, but probably still not good enough to unseat the Cardinals at the top of the division. Some pundits are picking the Reds to finish second in the division. I don’t see it, but who knows. Stranger things have happened.
So, did I ever make a decision? Are the Cubs going to be better, the same, or worse than they were in 2009? I expect them to play better in 2010 than they did in 2009, but not by much. The Cubs will continue to trot out a team that is worse than their payroll would indicate. Until the Cubs can put together a team that features a middle infield that is at least league-average, they are going to continue to struggle. I had hoped they would address that deficiency this off season, but instead, they held fast.
Until things change, I don’t expect things to change. Not much.
