How many sure things do we have in our lineup right now?

[Can_of_corn]

You are arguing a different point than I am. You think I am saying that defense doesn't matter. What I am saying is that it matters less than a team's ability to score runs or stop them with good pitching.

Again, find me (even an outlier) of a team that hit (adjusted for park factors) or pitched to the bottom of the league like that and made it to the World Series. It is possible to be good or even great with a bad defense. But it's not possible without at least one of the other things.

You haven't found a team that was last in defense yet.

And you called that a fact.

Weams found some teams that were close.

[Frobby]

I stand corrected, thought he was in the .550 range without looking at his numbers. Sure then, .650 is reasonable. What's the league average OPS for starting 2B though?

.696 for all 2B (starters or not) in 2014, in the AL.

[weams]

I think a pitcher controls, on the ace level, maybe 21 outs a game, on average.

How did the Tigers' collection of Aces do last fall?

He thinks that 27 strikeout is still in the realm of possibility. Just because Clemens or Kerry Wood could only do 20, does not mean that is the maximum.

[weams]

.696 in 2014.

Thank you for that effort.

[weams]

Again, find me (even an outlier) of a team that hit (adjusted for park factors) or pitched to the bottom of the league like that and made it to the World Series. .

The Kansas City Royals 2014.

[weams]

It is possible to be good or even great with a bad defense.

I argue that is not a bet anyone should ever take. It loses almost all the time.

[Can_of_corn]

The Kansas City Royals 2014.

14th in runs scored. I had already looked them up.

[weams]

14th in runs scored. I had already looked them up.

Ninth in the AL. League.

[ChuckS]

Here you go Weems:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/worst-defense-ever/

And is there really much difference between finishing 27th or 28th in defense and finishing 30th? If I wanted to spend all night I could find some team from some era that was rated last defensively by some measure and made it to the World Series. My original point stands. You can be consistently bad defensively and field good teams that make it to the playoffs and give you a chance to win in October. The same does not go for pitching and scoring runs.

[weams]

10th in OPS, 10th in OBP, 11th in Slugging.

[weams]

Here you go Weems:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/worst-defense-ever/

And is there really much difference between finishing 27th or 28th in defense and finishing 30th? If I wanted to spend all night I could find some team from some era that was rated last defensively by some measure and made it to the World Series. My original point stands. You can be consistently bad defensively and field good teams that make it to the playoffs and give you a chance to win in October. The same does not go for pitching and scoring runs.

Steroids. But you did make a point there. Guided by my effort and Corn's attention.

[weams]

I think we can all agree that in today's baseball, the teams that play fundamentally good baseball and hit well have a distinct advantage.

[Frobby]

The '85 Royals were 13th of 14 in runs and BA and 14th in OBP

[Beast]

Let me pose this another way then since apparently I am being proved incorrect with numbers which I have still failed to to see other than a few random mediocre OPS predictions from Weams. How many players on this team can we EXPECT to play the full season and have above average production at their position?

It would be nice to count five or six players in that category on a good offensive team. I would put Wieters and Machado in there with Jones and Hardy, but I don't think it's likely that both of them play 140 games. I have a good feeling about Pearce, but who knows what he will do.

I think there is a real arrogance on this board in just assuming things will come together for this team because we have had three winning season following 14 consecutive losing ones. There is complete blind faith in the front office and it seems like anyone who questions the path gets shot down pretty fast. We should have added a big bat or two this off-season whether through free agency or trade. Many other teams around baseball, some with more payroll constraints than us, have made quantifiable improvements. We have not and the pickings left are slim.

I don't post a lot on this board, but I do read many of the posts. The most arrogant opinion I see repeated often is the one that says the offseason is over in December. Who says the pickings are pretty slim now -- probably not Dan and Buck. Trades could still be made for Dexter Fowler or Jay Bruce or Seth Smith or ... Effective platoons can make a position strong. Last offseason the pickings were also deemed pretty slim by the time Duquette got around to addressing the offense. Most on this board did not want Cruz, and certainly did not want to consider him as our left-fielder, until his price came down. Why did his price come way down? Because Dan waited long enough. And even then, few here considered his performance in 2014 as likely to be a "sure thing." But that one signing made a huge difference in the perceptions of the fan base nonetheless. Let's wait to see how Dan's approach works out, as compared to the approaches of those who have been extremely active early in the offseason, when costs are at their peak. I don't see this attitude as arrogance, as you do, but simply as giving Duquette the benefit of the doubt after he's done pretty well for the past 3 years at assembling competitive teams. Some of us are just not so steeped in our own angst as others.

[Ven6]

I don't post a lot on this board, but I do read many of the posts. The most arrogant opinion I see repeated often is the one that says the offseason is over in December. Who says the pickings are pretty slim now -- probably not Dan and Buck. Trades could still be made for Dexter Fowler or Jay Bruce or Seth Smith or ... Effective platoons can make a position strong. Last offseason the pickings were also deemed pretty slim by the time Duquette got around to addressing the offense. Most on this board did not want Cruz, and certainly did not want to consider him as our left-fielder, until his price came down. Why did his price come way down? Because Dan waited long enough. And even then, few here considered his performance in 2014 as likely to be a "sure thing." But that one signing made a huge difference in the perceptions of the fan base nonetheless. Let's wait to see how Dan's approach works out, as compared to the approaches of those who have been extremely active early in the offseason, when costs are at their peak. I don't see this attitude as arrogance, as you do, but simply as giving Duquette the benefit of the doubt after he's done pretty well for the past 3 years at assembling competitive teams. Some of us are just not so steeped in our own angst as others.

Nailed it.