NL Central Prediction

1st: Cubs (93-69)
2nd: Cardinals (88-74)
3rd: Reds (82-80)
4th: Brewers (82-80)
5th: Astros (74-88)
6th: Pirates (71-91)

There shouldn't be much in the way of the Cubs and another division title this year. The team will miss Kerry Wood and Mark DeRosa but they may have been wise not to pay Kerry Wood the $10MM+ a year Cleveland is. Even if Milton Bradley can only play 100 games for the Cubs and Rich Harden only makes 20 starts, the Cubs should be OK. The Cubs' top 4 pitchers of Harden, Carlos Zambrano, Ryan Dempster and Ted Lilly will probably regress a bit from last season but if they can swing a deal for the Padres' Jake Peavy that rotation could be among the best in baseball history.

The Cardinals really surprised me last year by staying in contention all season and I think they should do again with a healthy Chris Carpenter (who is having a very good spring training) and a healthy Adam Wainwright. Their infield defense will be a problem however with Khalil Greene coming over from San Diego to play shortstop and outfielder Skip Schumaker moving to second base. I think their offense led by Albert Pujols and backed up by Ryan Ludwick and Rick Ankiel should be enough to vault the Cardinals to a wild card and a return to the playoffs.

The Reds are one of those teams that I think will break out every year, so I will keep with tradition and say they break out again. Big gains from Jay Bruce and Joey Votto should offset the mid-season loss of Adam Dunn and team with Edwin Encarncion and Brandon Phillips to make a respectable offense. The team discovered an ace last year in Edinson Volquez and improvement from Johnny Cueto and a bounce-back from Aaron Harang should bring the Reds back to respectability and allow them to make a run for the playoffs in 2010 with some savvy acquistions.

It is impossible to replace CC Sabathia and Ben Sheets at the top of any rotation and a full season of Yovani Gallardo and a free agent signing of Braden Looper won't be able to do it, although they should be respectable. The Brewers' potent offense led by Prince Fielder, J.J. Hardy, Ryan Braun and Corey hart is back this year though a midseason trade could ship someone like Fielder out of a top-of-the line pitcher. There is also the possibility that the the Brewers could sign Ben Sheets when he comes back from injury around August and he could be impetus to lead the Brewers down the stretch.

The Astros really surprised me when they made a late playoff push at the end of last season, but I think that was just a fluke. They have three really good players in Lance Berkman, Roy Oswalt and Carlos Lee (who was injured during the Astros' playoff push last year) but after that there's not much about which to get excited. There isn't really any pitching depth behind Oswalt and their offense has several holes. They sold the farm last offseason to acquire Miguel Tejada from the Orioles and he aged two years before he even had an at-bat and he is clearly on the decline. It may be time for the Astros to sell off their talent now and start re-building.

Once again, "Pittsburgh Baseball" is just another meaningless phrase. When you finish last in your division and your key off-season acquisition is Ramon Vazquez, another last place finish is pretty much inevitable. THe Pirates do have some talent deep in their minor leagues but that won't help for 2009. It'll be a successful season for the Bucs ifPaul Maholm continues to pitch well and if the likes of Ian Snell, Tom Gorzelanny and Andy LaRoche prove that they are major league material.

NL East Prediction

So over the next few days, I'll post my prediction for the 2009 MLB season, division-by-division. Today, I'll start with the NL East.

1st: Phillies (88-74)
2nd: Mets (85-77)
3rd: Braves (84-78)
4th: Marlins (79-83)
5th: Nationals (65-97)

I don't really like the Phillies' signing of Raul Ibanez, especially when a younger, better, right-handed Pat Burrell signed for cheaper and for fewer years. Nevertheless, most of last year's World Series winning team is back and their holes are relatively minor and could be resolved through trades or internally (starting pitching depth [right now the Phillies are banking on three tentative things: Cole Hamels' health, Brett Myers' consistency and 46-year-old Jamie Moyer's effectiveness], a left-handed reliever for the first 50 games [until J.C. Romero returns from suspension] and a right-handed bench bat).

The Mets' offseason reminds me of that scene from Vegas Vacation where Chevy Chase creates a hole in the Hoover Dam and tries to plug it with a stick of gum only to find more and more holes created. They did a great job revitalizing their bullpen by acquiring Francisco Rodriguez and J.J. Putz but there are enough other holes on this team to prevent them for winning the division. Last year, the Mets relied on the likes of Carlos Delgado, Fernando Tatis and Daniel Murphy to keep them afloat. They can't do that again. Their offense is rather weak outside of their three fantastic hitters--David Wright, Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran. Their rotation also drops off significantly after Johan Santana. I expect one of the two between John Maine and Mike Pelfrey to have a healthy, productive season but any time Livan Hernandez is in a starting rotation, there is a major, major problem.

Atlanta had a strange few months with their franchise player (John Smoltz) wearing something other than a Braves uniform for the first time since 1988. Additionally, the Braves had a lot of drama surronding their near-miss free agent signings of Rafael Furcal and Ken Griffey Jr. and also nearly missed out on A.J. Burnett and Jake Peavy. However, they still did a great job re-tooling their rotation by acquiring three decent starters in Derek Lowe, Javier Vazquez and Kenshin Kawakami. Their offense should be respectable and if they get improvement from Casey Kotchman and a rebound from Jeff Francoeur the Braves could be a scary team.

The Marlins took me by surprise last year by finishing above .500 and very well could do so again. Their young rotation of Ricky Nolasco, Josh Johnson, Chris Volstad, Andrew Miller and Anibal Sanchez could end up being the best in the National League. I am concerned that they gave up too many unspectatular but useful players in the offseason in Josh Willingham, Scott Olsen, Mike Jacobs, Kevin Gregg and Joe Nelson. They will need youngsters and rookies to fill these roles and if they are unable to do so and if there is expected inconsistency out of the young pitching, more names may be added to the 'give up' list come July 31st.

I don't really understand the Nationals' signing of Adam Dunn especially with a rotation that is in shambles and for a team whose one surplus is in first base/outfield type players (Nick Johnson, Dmitri Young, Josh Willingham, Austin Kearns, Elijah Dukes, Wily Mo Pena and Lastings Milledge). I guess the Lerners really need to placate fans after losing out on Mark Teixiera. I don't really see much to like about this team. They have one major league quality pitcher in John Lannan (maybe two if Jordan Zimmermann's spring isn't a fluke) and about the only thing fans have to get excited is the June draft where the Nationals will probably draft uber-prospect Stephen Strasburg (now that Jim Bowden is no longer around to say no).

Up Next: NL Central

On the Necessity of Cinderella Teams

THEY AREN'T. Necessary, that is. Other than the obligatory championship predictions, the majority of what I've heard on talk radio the past two days boils down to disappointed moaning, complaining, whining, and downright bitching. So, what if last year all four number one seeds made it to the Final Four? So what if this year the Sweet Sixteen is comprised of four 1's, four 2's, four 3's, two 4's, a 5, and a 12? These pundits act as if a tournament without a Cinderella team is an utter failure. If you get a Honus Wagner in every pack of Cracker Jacks and a Bill Ripken error card with every stick of gum, they aren't rare anymore. If a George Mason makes it to the Final Four every year, it loses its meaning.

So, Dear Columnists and Talk Show Hosts, WE KNOW. We know there is no Cinderella team in the Sweet Sixteen. Now that we know, you aren't allowed to bring it up again until after the tournament. We know that the brackets have been mostly *"Chalk," but stop saying this is a disappointment. Just because something is fun and extraordinary when it does happen doesn't mean it is disappointing when it doesn't happen.

I have some theories on why so many "experts" are making these complaints:

-They aren't big enough fans of the sport to appreciate the game itself, they just want a story to hype.
Although plausible, I don't really agree with my own theory here. Most of the guys I listen to at least seem like they are into it. Moreover, there are PLENTY of stories going on in the tournament right now. I'll talk about some of them in a second.

-The need for a "Cinderella" is just another manifestation of the sports writer, broadcaster, talk show host need to witness and cover one of the greatest moments in sports that will live on forever.
Seriously. Why can't "exceptional" suffice? Or even just "good"? Why does the question always have to be asked "Could [insert performance] in [insert sport] be THE BEST EVER? I've only (seriously) been following sports for about a year now, and I swear I've heard THE BEST EVER been mentioned hundreds of times. Give it a rest and enjoy the game for what it is. Stories can be told without them having to be one for the history books. Not to mention, your coverage will not be the make-or-break that determines how we remember a game or a tournament.

-Their brackets suck. Experts want to be the ones to pick the great upsets. They are pissed when the games go chalk because in their heads, they wanted to go chalk but forced themselves to pick a few "intelligent upsets."
I think this has a lot of merit. I know I do the same thing. I pick at least one 12 over a 5 seed as a rule. What makes me and other sports laymen different from the sports expert? I don't complain when I'm wrong, and my bracket is pretty bad. Keep watching. I say again, appreciate the sport for the sport. This is not about you.

Whatever the reason may be, the fact is the media for the past two days has been harping on the fact that this tournament has so far proved somehow disappointing. They cite a lack of a Cinderella team. Stop emphasizing this. If a tournament is going chalk, then the Selection Committee must have done a decent job. And if your response is "But what about teams like Davidson, St. Mary's, and San Diego State?" then I say WHY AREN'T YOU WATCHING THE NIT? The tournament is 65 teams, not every pretty little mid-major can make it. The NIT is still quality basketball.

The point is, stop indoctrinating listeners to believe that something crazy seed-wise has to happen for March Madness to be "mad." There are currently sixteen very good teams left in the tournament and some very entertaining games to be had. That's mad enough for me. Despite the chalk, let's take a brief look at some of the better stories so far in only two rounds of the tournament:

-Before a single game had been played, yells erupt that Arizona should not have gotten into the tournament. They are the sole-surving PAC-10 team.
-Five, count 'em FIVE Big East teams are left, probably the most physical conference out there.
-Blake Griffin gets thrown and slammed into the floor by some dude know one has ever heard of (and I refuse to dignify him with looking up his name) from Morgan St. Griffin plays the bigger man and doesn't retaliate. He even tells Jim Rome that he understand why the guy did it.
-UConn posts the third largest winning margin ever in the tournament, beating Chattanooga by 56, honoring their hospitalized coach.
-For the superstitious and fellow Huskie fans, UConn won it all in 1999 and 2004, a five year difference. Five years later, it's 2009. Both times they came out of the West. 2009: They're in the West. Jim Calhoun has only missed two other tournament games. Both were years that they won it all.
-Pitt, a number one seed and many people's favorite, struggles in their first TWO games.
-Dayton knocks off West Virginia. Cleveland State knocks off Wake Forest!
-Marquette player Lazar Hayward steps over the line on an inbound pass with just seconds left to turn the ball over, eliminating the possibility of a buzzer beater and a sixth Big East team to move on.
-Not one, not two, but THREE twelve seeds beat the five seeds in the first round.

Those are just some of the highlights of a fantastic two rounds of play in this March Madness tournament. There is sure to be more where that came from. This list might not satisfy the sports media pundits, but it's enough to make me go crazy. Or should I say, mad.



*If you didn't already know, "chalk" refers to teams advancing that were favored to advance, based on seed.

Creation

Virginia is For Ballers is now in existence, so named because this author is a Virginian (and baller) and the topic will be sports. Commence.