Coming off a season in 2001 in which the Astros wrested their fourth division title in six years away from the St. Louis Cardinals, hopes were high in 2002 that the younger talent the Houston organization had nutured in the farm system and acquired through trade--Richard Hidalgo, Daryle Ward, Adam Everett, Morgan Ensberg, Wade Miller and Roy Oswalt--were ready to shoulder more of the load in the season, as several of the Astros' stars--Craig Biggio, Jeff Bagwell, and Shane Reynolds--began the slow, often frustrating transition to the later stages of their careers.

At first, it appeared that the young talent was going to do just fine. Wade Miller had nearly a perfect Spring Training, and Everett and Ensberg gave hints in ST that they were ready to take over at SS and 3B respectively. But the good work of March all but vanished in April. Miller was felled by a pinched nerve in his neck and missed nearly two months of work. Neither Ensberg nor Everett could hit big-league pitching when it counted. Daryle Ward, given the job in LF when Moises Alou was allowed to walk away to the Cubs, did a league-average job of hitting, but didn't provide nearly the power that the organization hoped for out of the # 5 spot with only 12 homers, and he proved to be the major leagues' worst defensive left fielder by a wide margin. Hidalgo, counted on to come somewhere close to his 2000 season of 44 homers and 122 RBI or at least to his 2001 figures of 19 homers and 80 RBI, was nowhere close to either one, hitting only .235, with 15 homers and 48 RBI.

When one couples the lack of punch in the middle of Houston's batting order with the loss of Miller and the understandable adjustment the Astros' bullpen had to make to the way in which new manager Jimy Williams likes to use his relievers, it's easy to see how and why Houston got off to such a rocky start. Faced with a tough early-season schedule against a Cardinals' ballclub that used ST mostly to get itself and its pitching rotation set for those early encounters, the Astros found themselves off by a fraction of an inch pitching at the plate, a half-second too slow swinging the bats, and a step too late on defense in those games against St. Louis. Houston lost 9 of 12 games versus the Cardinals in April and May, with the lost games in the last two three-game series being by a total of seven runs. Those close losses were enough to put the Astros into a nosedive from which they could not recover. They were, as I wrote in early June, finis for the year, although Gregg Zaun's pinch-hit grand-slam homer in the bottom of the ninth against the Diamondbacks on June 27th proved to be the season's most memorable moment and the spark for a long stretch of good play that got the club up to and over the .500 mark. Again, however, the Cardinals were the benchmark by which to judge the Astros' season, and Houston, with only a small chance to get back into the NL Central race in September, proved no match for the pitching depth of St. Louis. The Astros split four at home to the Cards over the long weekend of Sept. 12-15, with back-of-the-rotation man Peter Munro being edged by Woody Williams 2-1 in the pivotal Saturday afternoon game. The following weekend in St. Louis, the # 4 and # 5 starters were once again defeated, as the Cardinals bested Munro and Kirk Saarloos on Friday and Sunday to end the Astros' hopes of making the playoffs. There were other irritating and often inexplicable failures within the division (going only 9-8 against the woeful Brewers did not help the Astros at all), but by the end of the season--a three-game sweep on the road against the eventual NL champion Giants--Houston stood a decisive thirteen games in back of St. Louis, with some major overhauling to do in the off-season.

There were a few good individual performances in 2002. Miller recovered from his pinched nerve and posted a terrific 15-4 record. Roy Oswalt followed his splendid 14-3 rookie season with a fine 19-9 campaign. Lance Berkman established himself as one of baseball's best hitters by smashing 42 homers and leading the NL with 128 RBI. Geoff Blum, acquired by trade from Montreal, proved himself to be a good hitter and a better-than-expected fielder at 3B. SS Julio Lugo was having a solid if not spectacular season at the plate and in the field before getting his arm broken on a Kerry Wood pitch in Chicago around midseason, and Jose Vizcaino, in picking up for him, continued a surprisingly-good year for himself at the plate. Octavio Dotel and Billy Wagner once again proved to be a deadly late-game duo in the Astros' bullpen.

Beyond these noteworthy performances, however, the Astros as a collective unit proved to be less than the sum of their parts. Middle relief, stocked as it was with farm system hurlers and journeymen pitchers acquired at bargain prices, had moments of excellence, including a workhorse season from Ricky Stone, but was often ineffectual, despite sharing in a 3.81 bullpen ERA, the eighth-best such mark in the league. The offense was a hundred runs short of what it had been in 2001, and failed too often in close-and-late situations and hitter's pitch counts. (Ward hit .239 in close-and-late situations and only .172 with runners in scoring position and two out. Hidalgo hit .211 close-and-late, .174 with runners at 1B and 2B, and only .143 when the count was 2-0.)

The Astros, though, have great hopes that the offense in 2003 will be their best since 1998. Gerry Hunsicker has in recent days been engaged in a good-natured public relations spin about the offense over on Astros.com and in the press and on radio, saying that if a team hopes to contend for a title, it has to have a powerful offense. I could have sworn I heard him say a few years ago that if a team hopes to contend for a title, it has to have pitching. In reality, I believe Hunsicker privately inclines to the latter view. The praise of the Astros' hitting is serving at the moment to deflect most of the serious questions that must be answered in ST about spots 3-5 in the rotation and middle relief in the bullpen. This is not to say, however, that the praise of the Astros' offense is not merited; it's just that we've heard this particular PR spin before. Back in 1998, when Moises Alou was acquired from the Marlins, everyone close to the ballclub knew it was going to hit. The question was, how good was the pitching going to be? So it is in 2003. The Astros are going to hit. Spots 2-6 in the order (Biggio Berkman, Bagwell, Jeff Kent, Hidalgo) figure to be, collectively, as tough a row of hitters to face as there is in the National League. If Houston can get better OBAs out of spots 1, 7, and 8 (Lugo, Blum, and Ausmus), the offense could be better than improved; it could be great.

Assuming that there is some improvement in the offense (particularly from Hidalgo, who must rebound to no less than league average in hitting, homers, and RBI), Houston will go as far as its pitching will take it. Nothing is certain in baseball, and few things are certain in the empirical world. Yet, there are things well enough established in baseball to call them facts. Two of those facts are that, as long as they maintain their health, Roy Oswalt and Wade Miller will put up a lot of wins at the front of Houston's rotation. These two hurlers are as solid and comforting a pair of pitchers to Houston fans as Reynolds and Mike Hampton were in '98. Yet the Astros will stand or fall in 2003 based on what the back-end of the rotation does all season long in support of its mainstays. Gerry Hunsicker knows this, and he has taken what steps he can to strengthen that rotation. The press has been filled all off-season with stories about how the New York Yankees are stockpiling pitchers; but Hunsicker, in his mid-range budget way, has been doing exactly the same thing. Some of his low-risk gambles in recent years--Kent Bottenfield, Doug Brocail, Hipolito Pichardo--have failed so strikingly that the groans from Astros country were audible when Hunsicker began to repeat that signing pattern this past off-season. But the sheer volume of new pitchers who will be in camp this Spring--Jared Fernandez, Jesus Sanchez, Brian Moehler, Anthony Telford, Chris Gissell--in addition to those already known to the Astros--Jeriome Robertson, Kirk Saarloos, Peter Munro, Tim Redding, Scott Linebrink, Brandon Puffer--may give Jimy Williams and Burt Hooten a fighting chance to put together an effective rotation that will last most of the season, and give the bullpen a bit of versatility and depth.

The Astros have fewer questions about their everyday eight this season than they've had in the past. Geoff Blum is Houston's 3B; there will be no battle with Morgan Ensberg. Julio Lugo has claimed the SS job. Jeff Kent will be at 2B and Jeff Bagwell remains the anchor at 1B. Brad Ausmus is still a fine defensive catcher. Craig Biggio may have qualms about it, but few of us do: he is a good enough athlete to play CF, and his ability to do so may, in the long run, allow him to be fresher at the plate. Lance Berkman moves back over to the shorter range of LF, and Richard Hidalgo will track 'em down in RF. Whatever Hidalgo's offensive output may be in 2003, no one questions his defensive range or his arm.

There are those who like competition in ST; the battles for jobs, they say, make everyone better. I am not one of those who feel that way. I prefer a veteran ballclub, with most of the issues settled before camp opens. The Astros this year appear to be that kind of team. Whether they win or lose in the exhibition season is irrelevant; far more important will be their efforts to get ready for the regular season. They face much the same schedule this year as they did last, with lots of early games against two teams that gave them fits last season: a good Cardinals' club, and a not-so-good Brewers' team. I would expect (indeed, I would insist, if I were the Houston owner or GM) that Jimy Williams will manage with a firmer, more confident hand, and that he will put more pressure on his club to be ready for those important divisonal games in April and May. Houston may be a better team than it was last year, but it is not yet so good that it can afford to lose 9 out 12 again to St. Louis, and fall behind in the NL Central race.

I have taken a good look at the Astros' 40-man roster, including as many of the non-roster invitees as I think have a legitimate shot to contribute to the club at some point, and have written about them below. Part One discusses the probable Opening Day lineup. Part Two, to be presented on Friday, tackles the starting pitching rotation, the bullpen, the bench, and a few players in the minors who may be called upon to help the Astros from time to time during the year. Part Three of the preview, to be presented on Sunday, offers a breakdown of the season schedule series by series and a detailed forecast of how I think the 2003 season will unfold for Houston.

The Starting Eight

The group is starting to show some age (Biggio, Bagwell, Kent, Ausmus), but these four are still greatly productive and figure to remain so, to varying degrees, in 2003. The other four (Berkman, Blum, Hidalgo, and Lugo) are entering their peak years as players. Berkman has become an All-Star at the plate. If Blum and Lugo continue to develop as they did last year with regular playing time, and if Richard Hidalgo conquors the physical and mental challenges of playing the game and carrying the expectations that come with a big contract, then by June the Astros could be fielding one of the top three lineups in the National League, along with Philadelphia and Atlanta.

Initial figures in parentheses are a player's statistics from 2002; those at the end of the comments are a projection of what we can expect in 2003.

Catcher - Brad Ausmus (.257/6/50) Ausmus rebounded from a subpar 2001 to enjoy a year close to his career average of .260. The wear-and-tear of catching nearly every day may begin to show on him this season as it has not in the past, but it's also possible that if his backup Gregg Zaun can give him perhaps five additional days off, Ausmus could show slight improvement in his numbers because of the more productive batting order ahead of him. Ausmus learned some lessons last season about taking the ball to RF, a pattern he began late in 2001. That opposite-field approach robs Ausmus of what little power he has (he has never been a great power threat, even in a small ballpark), but it pays him back in overall offensive performance--moving runners along, keeping rallies going. He is likely to get even more opportunities to do those sorts of things in 2003. Defensively, Ausmus is the NL's Gold Glove catcher, but there is one note of caution about his defense that should be sounded: his "caught stealing" percentage dropped to .323 in 2002, down from .477 the previous year. His catcher's ERA, however, was lower in 2002 (3.82) than it was in 2001--testimony, I believe, to the sharpness of Ausmus's pitch calls and the confidence his pitchers have in him. There will be new men for Ausmus to handle this season, especially in the bullpen, so we might anticipate a few rough outings by the 'pen in April, but one new guy he's handled before: Brian Moehler, with Detroit. Assuming that Moehler is healthy in the first place, Ausmus will help make Moehler's transition to pitching in a smaller home ballpark easier than it might otherwise be, and bring him closer to the team's goal of double-digit wins out of the # 4 spot. Projection: (.251/8/48).

First Base - Jeff Bagwell (.291/31/98) We all know the end of Bagwell's terrific career is coming, but may we pause for a moment and suggest to ourselves that it may be farther down the road than we think? It's easy to say that Bagwell had an off-year in 2002, but "off" as compared to what? 1994? Sure, but that was nine years ago. Off year or not, Bagwell was within shouting distance of .300, still hit over 30 homers and barely missed driving in a hundred runs. His OPS of .919 stacks up pretty well next to Berkman's .982, and his close-and-late BA of .263 is quite respectable. For an old man, friends, Bagwell is still an offensive force; and one of the most optimistic notes I can sound in this preview is my belief that, in some respects, Bagwell will have a better season this year than he did last year. Last year, Bagwell was pitched to very carefully or pitched around many times because the opposition knew it had easier outs coming up in Ward and Hidalgo. Those situations aren't going to occur this season, not with Jeff Kent sittin' in the # 5 hole. Teams will have to bring it to Bagwell more often, and he may send a few more of those pitches to the seats as a result. But because Bagwell will see more pitches in '03, we all may get a better read on how far and how fast Bagwell will slip as a hitter, either this year or next. Bagwell's bat speed was a concern for me going into last season, and it's a concern for me this year, too; but it would surprise the daylights out of me if it suddenly became an issue early in the season. Bagwell actually struck out five fewer times in 2002 than he did in 2001, so even a slight increase in his K figure this season from 2001 is not necessarily cause for alarm. Two seasons ago, Bagwell hit for a slightly lower BA but slugged 39 home runs. The same thing is likely to happen this season. It's a trade-off the Astros will take. On defense, one has heard a lot of rumors this off-season that Bagwell's right shoulder is less painful than it has been. If that improvement in his condition is real, it may help him most of all on throws to 2B and 3B on grounders and bunt plays, to say nothing of what a pain-free batting swing might accomplish. Yet, Bagwell is Bagwell: whether he's hurt or feeling great, he gets more out of his body and gives more to his team every day in sharp, well-judged play than any other Astro out there. He plays a position that lowers his risk to injury and, as long as MLB doesn't ban the glove he wears and thereby make him vulnerable to breaking his hand on an inside pitch, my feeling is he can go as long as he wants to and he'll be productive to the very end. Projection: (.285/35/101)

Second Base - Jeff Kent (.313/37/108) This past December, Kent ran away from the San Francisco Giants to join the circus--the Cirque Du Solei troupe that performs under the retractable stadium roof in downtown Houston and specializes in the death-defying acts of falling off treadmills, plunging out of deerstands and eating two Double Whoppers at once every five days. Kent's specialty is doing cartwheels off a motorcycle, so he'll fit right into the program. He should fit the Astros in other ways, too. He's hit well in road games for the Giants in Houston, so there's no reason to think he won't do well in 81 games there. As I said in the days after Kent was signed, his principal value to Houston figures to be as an RBI man. If Kent can crack the 40-homer plateau using the Crawford Boxes as target practice, well and good; fans will cheer every one of 'em. But mark it down: Kent will be worth every penny the Astros have spent on him if his RBI total is between 110 and 115 and if about 20 of his homers are hit on the road. The point of acquiring Kent was not only to make the Astros a tougher offense at home, but also to make them a tougher offense night in and night out away from Houston. For this season, at least, to say nothing of 2004 or 2005, there should be far fewer men left on base, and far fewer rallies that grind to a halt in the # 5 and # 6 spots. Kent does not walk as much as Bagwell, but that could change if, as I anticipate, Jimy Williams drops him lower in the order in Houston. If Kent doesn't walk much (52 in 2002), he strikes out no more than Bagwell does (they both had 101 strikeouts last year). That particular statistical similarity to Bagwell stretches back several seasons. Offensively, then--and I know how overstated this may sound--it's hard for me to see how Kent could fail to help the Astros. Even if he should fall off significantly from the numbers of his 2002 season, he's not hitting in Pac Bell Park any more. Homers ought to be easy to come by, and he'll have plenty of RBI chances. Defensively, he's average, and may begin to show at some point the same lack of range that prompted in part Biggio's move to the outfield, but the Astros are not paying him for his glove; they're paying him for his bat. He may press some at the plate in April, seeking to please the fans and management, but he should be in gear by May. (Projection: .297/31/98).

Shortstop - Julio Lugo (.261/8/35) Lugo played in only 88 games in 2002 before Kerry Wood broke his right forearm with a pitch in Chicago, an incident I'm still conflicted about to this day. (Intellectually, I know Wood didn't do it intentionally; but the game context suggests otherwise; and that pitch, if you saw it, bore in on Lugo with the same relentless up-and-in movement that a Mike Torrez fastball pursued another Houston SS in 1984, Dickie Thon.) But those 88 games were impressive enough to make me believe that Lugo could be a critical figure in the Astros' success or lack of success in 2003. I've already suggested several weeks ago that Richard Hidalgo is the key to this year's lineup. If he has a solid year in all phases of the game, the Astros could be formidable, indeed. But include Lugo at the top of the lineup as a key figure, too. He needs to improve his OBA of .332 (.400 would be wonderful, but .380 will still impact the offense) and raise his BA by ten points, but those goals are within his reach. What excites me about Lugo is not only the possibility of marked improvement in the less-flashy elements of offense, but the strides he has made defensively. He was much smoother at SS last season than he was the season before. If you're not especially persuaded by that comment, consider that his fielding percentage has improved every year since 2000--.951, .964, .976. Lugo should come to ST this season more relaxed and confident than he ever has before, knowing the SS job is his. He may have some trouble breaking in his new partner at 2B (or is that the other way around?) but if they mesh well enough, the Astros probably will see a slight increase in the number of double plays turned in 2003. Projection: (.265/8/42).

Third Base - Geoff Blum (.283/10/52) Blum is another candidate to surprise us with a breakout year this season. Last year was his first full shot as an everyday player and he proved to be an even better player than we thought he'd be, especially on defense. He may not be capable of producing great numbers, but hitting seventh in the order the Astros have, he won't have to produce great numbers to be effective. An increase of 10-15 RBI is not out of the question, although if Richard Hidalgo has another bad season, Jimy Williams will likely have to slide Blum into the # 6 spot, and Blum's hitting might suffer as a result of that move. Projection: (.270/11/60).

Right Field - Richard Hidalgo (.235/15/48) Hidalgo will make the difference this year between the Astros being slighly improved over what they were a year ago and being one of the NL's elite teams. No is asking that he repeat his year of 2000. He cannot do so and he will not. But he can approach 2001 again. His numbers then (.275/19/80) would look mighty sweet in the # 6 spot now and would, of course, represent a significant upward turn from his horrible 2002 campaign. He can do it; he can be at least that good again; but Hidalgo must prove he can do it all over again. He's back to square one in his career. No one is going to assume any more that the RF job is his eternally, not with Jason Lane chomping at the bit to get out there and play. Whatever it was that affected Hidalgo's swing last season to the point where he could not get around on the fastball and missed hanging sliders that he crushed in 2000, whether it was excess weight (a story that, false or not, was still floating in respectable journalistic circles as late as last week: CBS Sportsline.com referred to him on the 10th as a "pudgy Venezuelan" who had lost weight) or a training program that left his muscles extraordinarily tight--whatever it was--Hidalgo's period of grace with the fans is now over. Nothing but solid results will be expected from him, and no excuses will be accepted from him (although he hasn't offered any), or from management on his behalf. He deserves our sympathy for the very unfortunate carjacking during which he was wounded in the left arm this past autumn, but he has recovered physically, if not mentally, from that incident. It is time for him to play baseball, and nothing will heal his spirit like recovering his zest for the game. In simplest terms, Hidalgo must teach himself again how to go out each night and have fun doing what he does. There are players in the major leagues that would make a bargain with the Devil to have a right arm like Hidalgo's; there are players in both leagues who have never hit a fair ball as hard as most of the ones Hidalgo has hit foul. When Hidalgo is at his finest, a pitch from the mound is a thing to be leaped upon and destroyed. At such moments, if he happens to be off by a fraction of an inch, the 3B coach's life is at risk. Yet, we saw only two weeks' worth of at-bats like that from Hidalgo in 2002, and the specific solution to his problems as a hitter may involve more than just re-kindling his enthusiasm for the game. To state a complex matter plainly, Hidalgo needs to control the strike zone. Of all the Astros' noteworthy hitters--Berkman, Bagwell, Kent, Biggio--Hidalgo does the worst job of all of them in attacking the fastball in the hitting zone and either fouling off or going the other way with pitches he can't drive. The idea is to force the pitcher to come to the plate with a pitch he doesn't want to throw, in a location he'd rather not reach. It's not exactly a new idea, and it's not like Hidalgo hasn't dominated a strike zone before (see Total Baseball under "Hidalgo, Richard," 2000), but this year is, for all practical purposes, the beginning of Hidalgo's career. He must learn again those things he appeared to master three years ago, and the learning, painful though it may be, might not be such a bad thing after all. I hope and I wish that Hidalgo and the coaches would use the time of March to reassess every part of Hidalgo's hitting game: his stance, his pitch selection, his bat speed, and his follow-through, with the goal of getting him back up to the level of performance he has every right to expect of himself. Truthfully, Hidalgo has a lot of work to do to get back to that higher level, and I can't say that I know he will do it because I know no such thing. I rather believe that Hidalgo will find it hard even to get back where he was two years ago, because I doubt that he or his coaches really sense the need for a reassessment of his approach as a hitter. The need is there. Projection: (.255/22/65).

Center Field - Craig Biggio (.253/15/58) There were two articles published recently about Craig Biggio that I hope you had a chance to read. One was a CBS Sportsline.com article Feb. 2 on how intense the negotiations were between Biggio, whose pride was more damaged than we thought in the move to CF, and Drayton McLane and the front office. The other was an insightful piece in the Houston Chronicle by Jose De Jesus Ortiz, taking us through the daily workout routine that Biggio has established to prepare himself for that very move. Although I've said these things before, they are worth repeating briefly here: Biggio can play CF. He has enough speed to get to the balls that any CF can get to in the home park. The change may benefit his career rather than hurt it. His Hall Of Fame chances may increase if he succeeds at a third position, and they won't be hurt if he fails. The question we ought to be asking, rather than worrying about whether Biggio can catch a long drive to center (which is, after all, just an infield fly on steroids) is, will Biggio have a significantly better year at the plate in 2003 than he did last year? The answer, I think, is "No," but "no" sometimes has to be qualified as much as a "yes" or a "maybe". Biggio has had a declining OBA four out of the last five seasons. That's not good (his high mark was .415, in 1997), but it may not be as significant a stat as Rob Neyer, for one, makes it out to be. In the years following 1997, Biggio's OBA was .403, .386, .388, .382, and .330. All of the averages, except last year's, have been consistent and consistently high, which makes me think that last year's startlingly-low figure was more of a fluke than a warning. The batting average was down, too, but the loss was of mere points, not of power or run production. Biggio is clearly in the last stage of his career, but he is not ready for the bench just yet. Given his solid fifteen-year numbers and his track record at bouncing back from injury and other down years (which coincided in 2000), it would be my judgement that another, albeit modest, comeback by Biggio is quite possible. The OBA will come up--just trust me on this. When Biggio wants to draw a walk, he can draw a walk. Whether his BA will improve is a more challenging question because of Biggio's perennial weakness for the slider, but an increase of five points or so would not surprise me at all. What I think we will continue to see, however, is an overall "sacrifice," if you will, of BA and OBA for additional power. Biggio can still hit the fastball. If his strikeout totals increase this year and his walk total remains the same as it was last year (50) or decreases, then I will admit that Biggio is done. But until then, he remains immensely useful, both as an OF and an unofficial reserve in the infield. Biggio may find himself in another new spot during the year, too. If he slumps batting second or first, Jimy Willams might very well drop him to sixth in the order to give him a break from the task of kickstarting the lineup. Biggio has done a multitude of things so well for so long--drawing a walk, rapping a single up the middle, lacing a double down the LF line, getting hit by a pitch, ripping the ball out of the park--that we have forgotten how multi-faceted the job of a 2 hitter or a 1 hitter can be when we see all that can be done in the spot. There are very few top of the order men in baseball who can do all of the things that Biggio can do, but perhaps it is time to realize that Biggio need no longer be required to do all of them in order to contribute to the Astros. Houston still needs him, and it will gratefully take whatever he can give. If Biggio does have a slightly better year in 2003 than he did last season--and I think he will--the reason will probably be the fresher legs the ballclub allowed him to keep by moving him to CF. Projection: (.260/13/62).

Left Field - Lance Berkman (.292/42/128) Those who think that Berkman's career track has followed Hidalgo's--a slow rise to a peak, followed by a decline and then a crash--can relax. Berkman's career has not been nor will be anything like Hidalgo's. After a brief 34-game look in 1999, Berkman's numbers have been solid ever since. Both the average and the power have been there from day one, in contrast to Hidalgo, whose numbers have fluctuated in the way I have described over his career, which is longer than Berkman's by two seasons. Only injury can stop Berkman from becoming one of the finest hitters in Houston history. Most of us would still like to see him become more of a threat from the right side of the plate, his natural side, but he's already a threat that way, too, just with less power. One of the benefits of Biggio's move to CF is the resulting move of Berkman back to LF, a switch that may save as much wear on Berkman as it does on Biggio. I don't think the switch guarantees, however, that we will see another 120 RBI season from Berkman, although we might. More probably, we're looking at a guy who'll drive in 100-110 runs every year. If that's what he does this season for Houston, that'll be good enough. On the other hand, I don't believe Berkman's reached his peak yet. Exactly what his peak might be is hard to say, but considering the park he plays his home games in, his home run power and his batting eye, I'd say a Triple Crown season in 2003 or 2004 might constitute a fair peak. Berkman does have the ability to be a Triple Crown winner. He also has the ability to hit 50 homers a year or to hit .300 every year. My sense, though, is that he will sacrifice those ego-driven goals to be the relentless run-producer the Astros need. Projection: (.295/36/104).

In summary, the Astros' starting lineup--SS Lugo; CF Biggio; LF Berkman; 1B Bagwell; 2B Kent; RF Hidalgo 3B Blum; C Ausmus--is potentially a terrifying group for a pitcher to face. They have little speed on offense, but if they mash the ball like they did in 2000 or in 1998, they won't need much speed, although exchanging Kent for Ward in the # 5 spot may keep the Astros from grounding into as many double plays as they hit into last year. Defensively, however, they've probably gained a step or two at 2B and in LF, and that's going to make them better defensively overall, even if Biggio proves to be only an average CF. The interior defense is better than people think. The Astros led the league in fielding percentage in 2002--a devalued statistic these days, perhaps, but not a meaningless one.

The Starting Rotation

Houston's starting five on the mound this season will call to mind both the excellence of contemporary baseball and pleasant memories of pitching staffs from a bygone era. As a duo, Wade Miller and Roy Oswalt have only Randy Johnson and Curt Shilling of Arizona and Barry Zito and Mark Mulder of Oakland as their peers, and the day is coming--perhaps it will arrive this season--when Oswalt and Miller will begin a long run as the pre-eminent pitching tandem in the National League. Although they do not form a left-right combination the way that Warren Spahn and Johnny Sain did for the Boston Braves or Sandy Koufax and Don Drysdale did for the Dodgers, the reponsibility that both of Houston's aces carry is exactly the same and nearly as heavy a burden. The game is different now than it was in 1947 through 1951 when Spahn and Sain pitched together or in the 1960s when Koufax and Drysdale shut out every team between here and Mars. All four of these men worked in an era of four-man rotations and logged more starts and usually more innings than most pitchers will today. As any fan of the old Braves will tell you, it really was the case that people could only think of "Spahn and Sain, and pray for rain."

It's been a long time since any Houston baseball fans have had to concern themselves with rain's potential to nudge along a thin pitching staff in April and May and through the occasional showers of June, but Miller and Oswalt nonetheless have the challenge of anchoring a rotation about which there are many questions to be answered in Spring Training. It's been said several times already this off-season, but it cannot be said too often or too strongly: if the leading candidates for spots 3, 4, and 5 in the rotation are healthy and remain so for an extended period, the Houston Astros have a better than 50-50 chance to be a superior team. If they are not healthy, however, then the precious depth that Gerry Hunsicker quietly went about stockpiling over the winter will used to the maximum. Every pitcher has periodic aches and pains during the season but, that said, it is worth remarking that nearly every one of Houston's pitchers--including most of the leading candidates to be pitchers on this year's team has had serious arm trouble in the past. I'm looking at a fair list of Houston pitchers as I write, and the only men who haven't had any arm trouble or other physical problems that I'm aware of are Tim Redding and Kirk Saarloos. With all due respect, then, to the cheerful optimism of a Shane Reynolds or a Brian Moehler in regard to how good they feel about lasting the full year, the odds are that the last three spots of the Astros' starting five will undergo some degree of change as the season unfolds. That probability makes forecasting the productivity of a rotation a hard business but, with the understanding that a 162-game schedule takes place over a long time, there are still some observations about the Astros' starters that can carry appropriate weight, pitchers who can be pencilled in and discussed as likely contributors to the team this season.

Wade Miller (15-4, 3.28) Miller is no Rodney Dangerfield, but it seems to me that he still doesn't quite get the respect he deserves at the top of Houston's rotation. The season he had in 2002 after recovering from the pinched nerve in his neck was nothing short of phenomenal. His twelve-game winning streak was one of the all-time great sustained pitching performances in Astros' history. That fastball and that slider he throws are completely impressive, intimidating pitches, heavy stuff that most batters just can't handle, especially if they wear a Brewers uniform. As long as his neck feels fine--or as long as there's treatment for it if it doesn't feel fine--Miller will put up outstanding numbers again. Odds are that the spread between his wins and losses won't be as great this year as it was last, but he is now in the fullness of his peak years with the Astros, and I honestly expect that with good health and a team hitting and fielding for him as well as they are capable, he will be a twenty-game winner this year. Projection: (20-12,3.20).

Roy Oswalt (19-9, 3.01) Almost unnoticed at the end of Oswalt's wonderful 19-9 season, a season that included a nine-game winning streak, was the fact that he lost three out of his last four starts and looked bad doing it. I mention this to suggest that, as valuable as he is, Oswalt needs to be handled carefully during the year. Weight training has bulked up his once pencil-thin legs, enabling him to drive off the mound more consistently in each of his games, but he is still susceptible to pulled hamstrings and fatigue. Then again, so is Pedro Martinez, among his other ailments. But that cautionary note aside, I'm just going to go ahead and say it: I think that this year, with this team, Oswalt will take his place as the second-finest pitcher in the National League. Randy Johnson is still the best there is and will remain so until his body no longer enables him to throw, but Oswalt will pass Curt Shilling by as the # 2 guy. I tend to wax rhapsodic about Oswalt, but I can't help it. The man's stuff, and his command of it, is just extraordinary. "Command" is the right word for it, by the way; a good pitcher has control of his stuff, but Oswalt lashes that fastball and slider of his over the outside corner, or snaps that curveball off at a hitter's belt, like Indiana Jones cracking his bullwhip at the German army. When he pitches, there is absolutely no doubt who is in charge or what the outcome of the game will be. Oswalt can go through periods of wildness or hittabilty, but we tend to remember them precisely because they are very rare and very brief. It would help him quite a bit this year, particularly psychologically, if Shane Reynolds could step up and have one last Shane Reynolds-like season to take some of the pressure off that Oswalt feels from being counted on so heavily. I have a feeling, however, that this year, though Oswalt would welcome such support, he won't need it. Projection: (23-6, 3.16).

Shane Reynolds (3-6, 4.86) Reynolds went down so quickly last season that I don't honestly have a clear recollection of it happening, even after consulting my notes. His chronic back trouble has been such a concern over the past couple of seasons that it has misled some fans--including this one--into thinking that Reynolds is injury-prone when, in fact, he is not. Chronic conditions are, by definition, ongoing medical issues, but if Reynolds is indeed healthy and can handle a regular load of work again, he could be a major boost to a rotation that urgently needs to find a top-quality third starter. At this stage of his career, that is exactly the role Reynolds should be filling, rather than the role of a # 1 or a # 2 man. If his back holds up, he'll get a lot of starts and rack up a lot of decisions, but his innings pitched last season divided by the number of games started yields a figure we ought to pay attention to: Reynolds is trending toward becoming a five and six-inning pitcher rather than the seven and eight inning pitcher that he once was and that Miller and Oswalt now are. The bullpen will have to pick up for him quite a bit. Yet part of that decline is traceable not just to injury but to simple, inevitable aging. Reynolds still has a lot to offer the Astros. His poise and knowledge of how to pitch were just as sorely missed last season as his curve and split-finger pitches were. Reynolds is around the plate a little too much for my taste, a lot like Dave Roberts used to be, but when he's pitching well and there's a game out there that the Astros have to win, I'll take my chances with Reynolds any day of the week. I'm also going to buy into the notion that he truly is ready to return to his old form this season, in part because I believe it, and in part because Houston needs him in order to win the NL Central. Projection: (14-14,4.15).

Brian Moehler Moehler, like Astro newcomer Jared Fernandez, defeated Houston in a game with Cincinnati last season, prompting Gerry Hunsicker to place his name along with Fernandez's in this year's competition for the coveted Bob Knepper "Since-You-Can-Beat-'Em, Join-'Em" Award. All kidding aside, the acquisition of Moehler might turn out to be one of Hunsicker's best deals, if the ex-Tiger and Red is as healthy as he says he is. At the very least, the signing of Moehler makes more sense than taking a gamble on Kent Bottenfield did three years ago. Moehler has had double figures in wins in four of his seven big-league seasons, and those wins were achieved for Tiger teams that weren't nearly as good as Houston is. His curve and hard sinker should make pitching at home a less traumatic experience than it was for Bottenfield or Jose Lima, and he has Brad Ausmus to help him with the transition. Still, no one will know for sure how much Moehler can give the Astros until he actually begins pitching, and he has never pitched in a ballpark quite like the one in downtown Houston. But he is, when healthy, a reliable fourth starter, and I respect any pitcher who can labor with Detroit as effectively as Moehler did while facing all those power-laden, no-rest-for-the-weary lineups of the American League. We might fairly expect Moehler's arm to be a little stronger, a little more durable than it was in 2002, and thereby optimistically project that he'll return to ten wins a season and, with a better ballclub behind him, maybe do a touch better than that. Projection: (12-13, 4.06).

Peter Munro (5-5, 3.57) Munro was an unsung hero of last season's 84-78 team. He had the best ERA of any starting pitcher on the Astros' staff not named Oswalt or Miller, and in doing a creditable job he perhaps put himself in the lead to claim the fifth spot this year in Spring Training. Munro doesn't have exceptional stuff, but he does have good control and a solid idea of what he wants to do out there. There's some question about whether he could hold up over the long rigors of an entire season, but that question is likely to be answered pretty quickly in ST, both by his performance on the mound and by management, which plans to sit down early with their pitchers and divide them into candidates for the bullpen or candidates for the starting rotation. Munro fits more comfortably in the latter group and, because of the location problems that cropped up for Tim Redding and Kirk Saarloos last season, rates a slight edge right now over the other contenders for the fifth spot. He may find, however, that keeping the fifth spot the whole season is just as tough as earning it. Projection: (3-6, 4.01).

Such is the fluid nature of the situation, however--what with injury problems, varying levels of talent and experience, and the needs of the ballclub--that I could very well be wrong about the impact of both Reynolds and Moehler on the team. It just might turn out that Moehler and Reynolds will collapse, so to speak, and that a younger man will step forward and develop, giving the Astros the output I've predicted for the veterans, while Reynolds and Moehler drop back to numbers like those that Munro and Saarloos posted last year.

Munro is by no means the only good candidate to crack the rotation. The man the Astros' front office probably hopes will mature into that last starter is Tim Redding. To say that management favors Redding over everyone else would be wrong; it's just that, if he ever does harness his fastball and formidable curve, he could change the equation in the rotation completely, making an impact beyond anyone else. His stuff is that good. You may have read his comments last week in his hometown newspaper about how excited he is to get the season underway. It is good that he feels that way, but he also knows that this is a big year for him. If he doesn't land a rotation spot, he may find his options narrowing. It is possible--but not likely--that if he misses out on a starter's job, Houston could put him in the bullpen, though there are more suitable alternatives than Redding for a set-up man. He could also be traded. If Redding wants to avoid both of these outcomes, he'll have to get focused and stay that way from day one of camp. Otherwise, he'll find himself in the company of life's other famous Redding, sittin' on the dock of the bay.

Kirk Saarloos deserves as full a shot as the Astros can possibly give him. He had a pretty good shot last season, too, and was sometimes brilliant, sometimes horrible in posting a 6-7 record. I see visions of Greg Maddux in this man. Whether he has the passion to study hitters like Maddux does, or the drive to throw pitches in practice over and over until the pitch goes here and not there the way Maddux does is not clear to me, but in regard to the characteristics of poise and having a very good idea of what he wants to do with each pitch, Saarloos is ahead of his competition. There was a report early last week from an Internet source--I forget whom--which suggested that Saarloos is an excellent candidate for a long relief man if he does not win a starting job. Unless that writer was getting his information from a highly placed official of the Astros, though, I have to question whether the suggestion is believable. Saarloos doesn't have burning stuff, like Redding does, that he can blow by a hitter even if he misses his location. It would be hard for him to come into a game and immediately find a groove. I have to believe that if he doesn't make the Opening Day roster as a starter, he'll be sent to New Orleans.

If the Astros are in fact looking for a swing man, Jesus Sanchez might be a better candidate than Saarloos. He's got pretty good stuff, and has experience coming out of the 'pen. He's also left-handed, which is a point in his favor no matter what role he fills. He has one principal drawback: as a starter, he's given up a lot of homers, but that tendency might be curtailed in a relief role. Reading between the lines of Gerry Hunsicker's press conference when he announced the Sanchez signing, I got the impression that this was a man Hunsicker really wanted, so I would rate the chances of him sticking around as fairly high.

Jeriome Robertson almost has to be listed as a dark horse candidate for the starting spot, though he may privately be up higher in the estimation of the club than anybody knows. Like Sanchez, he's a lefty with good stuff, who seems to have gotten his game together after a troublesome career in the high minors with nagging injuries. Since Robertson has so little big-league experience (9.2 innings with Houston last season), I regard him as a man who'll have to work even harder than the others to win a spot.

There's a final pair of pitchers who, until they prove otherwise, might be regarded as ST fodder: Jared Fernandez, a knuckleballer, and Anthony Telford, who pitched most recently for the Rangers. Both of these men are going to have to push it to win a starting spot, but even that may not be enough. They may have to hope that one or more of the other candidates goes down. Fernandez actually beat the Astros last season, so he can pitch, but whether he can sustain more than periodic excellence for a big-league team is a serious question. I'll say more about one other pitcher the Astros have, Chris Gissell, in a moment.

Whatever the outcome of the competition for the fifth spot in the rotation, you can bet one thing: Hunsicker will keep the phone numbers of every one of them handy, including the non-roster invitees (Sanchez, Fernandez, Telford, Linebrink, Munro). What that may mean is that when July 31st rolls around this year, Drayton McLane, who is watching his budget even more carefully after the signings of Jeff Kent and Craig Biggio, may not authorize a trade for pitching help. Instead, one of these guys may get a call back. As for how I think the survivors of the battle for the fifth rotation spot will fare with the Astros, you'll have to wait for Part Three of the Preview on Tuesday.

The Astros did not do as I hoped they'd do in the off-season and acquire a top-tier starting pitcher, but what they did do was obtain enough mid-level arms--Moehler, Sanchez, Fernandez, Telford--to push last year's inconsistent young starters, Saarloos and Redding, down one slot in the pitching order. The Astros were stung several times last season, especially late in the year, by pitching matchups that simply didn't favor them--Munro loses to Woody Williams of the Cardinals; Saarloos pitches well out west against Hideo Nomo of the Dodgers, but has to turn things over to the bullpen and the Astros fall; Jeriome Robertson is pressed into service in a make-up game at Arlington and falls victim to bad fielding and a better-than-it-should-have-been-allowed-to-be performance from Chan Ho Park of the Rangers. Those matchups figure to change this season, assuming that Reynolds and Moehler are healthy enough to do the lion's share of the work in turns # 3 and # 4. Unless Saarloos or Redding takes a giant step this Spring and develops to a degree I cannot anticipate (and either man could do so), it was my feeling late last season and is my feeling now that neither man alone is likely to emerge as a full-fledged, full-time fifth starter, but there's a reasonable chance that, collectively, Munro, Redding, Saarloos and possibly Jesus Sanchez, will give the Astros better work at the bottom of the rotation this year than the club got last year

The Bullpen

If Reynolds and Moehler remain in the rotation all or most of the season, the bullpen will get less work and fewer W-L decisions than in last year's busy 22-23 season. The number of appearances will decrease slightly for the middle relievers, but save opportunities should be abundant for the late-inning men.

Because the Astros have a number of players who can play several positions, there's a strong possibility Houston may carry twelve pitchers on its Opening Day roster. If so, that may temporarily help someone like Brandon Puffer, who did a fair job last season but who will likely find himself getting squeezed out as this year's camp opens up. As the season unfolds, I expect some contributions from a few of the men I've already mentioned, particularly Sanchez and Saarloos, and I've listed what I think those contributions will be here, under the bullpen. At the moment, both depth and quality appear to be issues for the relief corps, but the Astros do have some interesting though untested arms down there and three locks:

Billy Wagner (4-2, 2.52, 35 saves) Doubtless the fan debate over Wagner should be (or should have been) traded will continue, but the argument is over whether Wagner's salary is too high given his relative contribution to the team, not over the talent that he brings to the mound whenever he's called upon. Rather than spending a lot of time wishing he were somewhere else, I'd encourage Astros fans to meditate for a while on what a joy it is to have as solid a duo as Wagner and Octavio Dotel in the bullpen. Hope springs eternal that Wagner will someday gain full command over his sometimes wayward slider or that he will add a wicked off-speed pitch to his two awesome out pitches, but he's pretty good as it is. If the Astros' offense improves as anticipated, Wagner should come in holding a two-run lead rather than one-run lead more often this year, and that should translate into a few more saves. Projection: (2-2, 2.12, 38 saves).

Octavio Dotel (6-4, 1.85, 6 saves) Dotel makes me happy. You know why? It became clear during the 2000 season that Dotel was a pitcher more suited to the bullpen. After a little bit of grousing, Dotel accepted the new role in 2001 and 2002 and became the great set-up man it was apparent he could be. Dotel can also be a closer, but it is best not to wish anything bad on Wagner; Wagner's percentage of blown saves is lower than Dotel's over the last three seasons. That means Dotel is best right where he is, as a frequently-unhittable force in the seventh and eighth innings. You may also recall the words I wrote in appreciation of him for the recent All-Time Astros Team: when Dotel is on, his stuff is harder to hit than Wagner's. Projection: (3-1, 1.97, 4 saves).

Ricky Stone (3-3, 3.61) Why is it that every time I think about Stone I think about Lucy Ricardo and want to call him Little Ricky Stone? The man's way better than the ratings-generated son of a famous TV bandleader. He's a sturdy, reliable middle-reliever who may be better this season for Houston if he doesn't have to work quite so often (78 games in 2002). He won't be in a position to gain many wins, losses, or saves, but the work he does in picking up for Reynolds, Moehler, and Munro will be invaluable. Projection: (2-2/3.3.30).

Brad Lidge (1-0, 6.23) Lidge, I think, will be one of ST's most pleasant surprises. He'll make the club and spend the year healthy in the 'pen, being used mostly an inning at a time--frequently the seventh--pushing Dotel's appearances more often to the eighth inning. Lidge has great, blow-'em away stuff, and if he takes hold of the job even more greatly than I anticipate, the Astros' win total will be even higher than I have calculated. One intriguing possibility about the way a healthy Lidge could affect Jimy Williams's use of the staff: if the Astros' starting pitchers get in a really tight bind, Dotel could make a start or two if necessary and Lidge could take Dotel's set-up spot. I put this thought out mostly as an offering of ST fun and dreaming, but it does serve as an example of what I mean by greater flexibility from the bullpen this year. Projection: (1-2/2.45).

Jesus Sanchez Whether Sanchez makes the starting rotation or not, I expect him to make the club. The temptation to include a left-hander on the staff--and the potential usefulness of adding such a pitcher--will be too great for management to ignore. Sanchez could be fine in long relief, 2-3 innings at a time, and he can be a spot starter if the Astros need him to be, although if everyone remains healthy, he won't be overloaded with work. Projection: (2-3, 4.24).

Scott Linebrink Linebrink is a non-roster invitee this Spring who'll be battling Puffer for the last spot in the 'pen if the Astros carry twelve pitchers. The front office remains intrigued by Linebrink's sinking stuff, and if he has learned to command it better and can remain free of injury, he could be a stronger contributor than he has been in the past. Projection: (0-0, 4.17).

Other Men Who Will Be Certain Pitching Factors In 2003

Tim Redding (3-6, 5.40) Redding has apparently worked hard this off-season with his old coaches refining his mechanics. He's also had more than one conversation with those coaches about his composure and approach to the game. If those talks and that work pay dividends, both Redding and the Astros will be better. But if Redding does not become the fifth starter, he need not despair. I believe there's an excellent chance that he'll be called upon fairly early in the season. The stats he'll put up if he remains much like the pitcher we've seen the past two seasons may not be all that impressive, but down in the fifth spot, or as a temporary starter in place of one of the other four, they'll be impressive enough. Projection: (6-8, 4.12).

Kirk Saarloos (6-7, 6.01) If Saarloos doesn't win the last rotation spot, he'll be sent to New Orleans. He will spend some time with the big club this year, but exactly how much, if he's not in there every fifth day, remains to be seen. Management may have taken more notice of how hard Saarloos got whacked around last season in his bad games than it did the good work in his most impressive performances, but I do expect that, one way or another, Saarloos will contribute a share to the Astros' success. Projection: (3-2, 4.28).

Left Outside The Mix

If one of your favorites is on this list, my apologies, but look at it philosophically: every year on every club, there are guys who get left out. It happened to Ricky Stone two seasons ago, and it'll happen to somebody this year. The most prominent candidate to get left out, to me, as you may have already guessed, is Brandon Puffer, who really shouldered a load for Houston last season, but whose slider flattened out too often in the second half of the year. If Williams and Hooten find better men among this year's alternatives, I don't see Puffer making an impact. The best he can do, perhaps, is to switch places with Linebrink. Also to be cut at some point are Anthony Telford and Jared Fernandez, who was already cut loose by the pitching-thin Reds. Jeriome Robertson will be given a couple of starts in ST probably, but he will not make the club. To be honest, I don't know what his future with the club will be if he can't be a starting pitcher, and the Astros themselves may not know, either.

The Bench

I am worried about the Astros' bench this year. There's just not a lot of pop there, and there will be less if the Astros carry twelve pitchers. But the bench does have a virtue: it figures to be versatile.

Jose Vizcaino (.303-5-37) In answer to a question that was asked after Part One was posted, I do expect that Vizcaino's playing time will decrease in 2003. Julio Lugo's injury was a freak thing and unlike the Bagwell scenario, wherein Bagwell dives into the ball at the plate, exposing his left hand, such an injury is not likely to happen again. Yet, Vizcaino should remain a useful man on the club, filling in at both SS and 2B and being a reliable singles hitter off the bench. Projection: (.263/2/25).

Gregg Zaun (.222/3/24) Zaun was a big disappointment to me last season. I thought he'd be better in both aspects of the game. It remains to be seen this year whether he is truly as poor a hitter as he was last season and whether he can make any improvement defensively, which is what the Astros should be hoping. Projection: (.235/2/31).

Morgan Ensberg (.242/3/19) There's an argument to be made, I suppose, that Ensberg would be better left in New Orleans as a candidate to be called up in the event of an emergency, but that argument carries less weight now than it did a year ago. Time marches on, and prospects have moved up in the Astros' chain. If all that Ensberg can lay claim to is a reserve spot, then that will have to do. And that may not be such a bad thing. Ensberg is one of the few men the Astros have on the bench who carries some power in his bat, and I expect the club to keep him around because of it. Otherwise, Jimy Williams faces the troublesome prospect of watching Vizcaino fill in at 3B, a position he just doesn't have the quickness for. Projection: (.255/6/31).

Jason Lane (.290/4/10) One of the most interesting questions we can ask in ST is how much playing time will Lane get in 2003? As in the case of Ensberg, the same argument for sending Lane over to New Orleans can be made, but Houston will need his bat sooner or later. It might as well be sooner. Lane can hit for average and, given time (chronological time, not necessarily tons of playing time) he'll hit for more power than he showed last season. He can play an adequate RF or CF, and he appears to have the happy, Bill Spiers-like trait of seeming to get more out of his ability than we think possible. If the Astros do send him back down, they'll be delaying an opportunity for a young man who can contribute right now. I think Lane could become what Euribel Durazo was to the Diamondbacks' bench the past two seasons. But ya gotta let him play and find his niche. Projection: (.296/7/35).

Brian Hunter (.269/3/20) Here's where matters get dicey on the Astros' bench. Eventually, I believe, the Astros are going to have to choose between Hunter and Orlando Merced. Both carry heavy contracts relative to their contributions (Hunter $1.2 million, Merced $1.7) and one of them will be traded or let go at some point, although it's not clear which one it will be. Assuming for the purposes of this preview that the Astros carry twelve pitchers rather than eleven, Hunter would be my choice over Merced because of his speed. He's a decent singles hitter, a good defensive OF and the Astros' best pinch-running option to boot. Projection: (.274/2/25).

Bench Splinters
Two other possible bench players are Orlando Merced and Victor Hall. If the Astros keep only eleven pitchers, then they'll have the luxury of retaining Merced's services. Merced can still hit (.287/6/30) but both injury and age slowed him down last season, and he's not as valuable in the field as he once was. Barring a payroll trade or other move in ST, look for the Astros to eat his salary at some point during the year and let him go. They could do so particularly if Hall, who was obtained in the Rule V draft, gets enough seasoning in the minor leagues by the middle of the year. Hall is fast and can hit, although right now he's also a strikeout machine. His game is a little rough around the edges, but if you're lookin' for a guy who could come in and give the Astros a boost before the All-Star Break, Hall could be it. SS Adam Everett is still in the hunt for a bench spot, but he probably won't hit enough in the Spring to merit one. The same goes for Alan Zinter, whose well-earned fifteen minutes of fame last season have now been used up.

Dark Horses In Camp And Guys We Could See In September
C John Buck, P Greg Miller, P Chris Gissell, P Santiago Ramirez, P Jimmy Barrett, P Miguel Saladin, LF Henri Stanley, CF Collin Porter--Miller, obtained a few years ago in the Carl Everett trade with the Red Sox, could make the opening roster if Linebrink or Puffer or Sanchez is just are not impressive enough. He has good stuff but has struggled with both minor injuries and command of that stuff in the minors. Gissell was 8-12 with Iowa last season in the PCL and could push his way past the Fernandezes and Telfords of the world with a good spring. If Saarloos or Redding should get hurt, robbing the Astros of that depth, Gissell could step in. Buck, Barrett, Ramirez, Saladin, Stanley, and Porter are all candidates to be called up in September based on their performances in the minors this year and on the Astros' needs eight months from now. Buck has all the tools to be a major league catcher; Ramirez, Saladin, and Barrett have live arms and good control; Stanley and Porter are overachievers who have forced their way into future consideration by the organization. It's unlikely that any of them will be summoned before September, but Buck will be the Astros' backup catcher, if not the starter, in 2004, and Ramirez and Saladin will press for spots on the staff, then, too.

The Schedule

Earlier, I observed that there are several questions to be answered about spots 3, 4, and 5 in the rotation. There may also be a question about which man, Wade Miller or Roy Oswalt, will fill the # 1 slot this season. Such discussion and such a decision often makes a difference, especially as the season rolls into the hot months of June and July and the decisive month of September, in how a team matches up with another team in a series. Wade Miller filled the # 1 slot for the Astros last year and, for purposes of this schedule analysis, I have assumed he will do so again, although I am aware that Roy Oswalt, by virtue of his aggregate statistics, is considered by most fans and perhaps by the Astros themselves as the team's ace. I have absolutely nothing against Oswalt (he is my favorite contemporary Astro), but there's a modest argument to be made in favor of keeping Miller in the # 1 spot.

I compared both Miller's and Oswalt's statistics for the last two seasons in three categories: record vs # 1 or # 2 starter, record in games decided by one and two runs (i.e., close games), and batting average by pitch count late in games. Miller was 4-5 vs a # 1 starter in 2001 (or 5-4, if you don't count his loss to LA's Chan-Ho Park as a loss to a # 1 or # 2 guy). He was 6-4 vs a # 1 or a # 2 starter in 2002. Oswalt was 1-1 vs # 1 and # 2 starters in 2001, and 10-1 vs # 1 and # 2 in 2002. In close games, Miller was 4-1 with 6 no-decisions in one-run games in 2001; in 2002, he was 1-1 in one-run games with 3 no-decisions. In two-run games, Miller was 3-1 with 1 no-decision in 2001; in 2002, he was 4-1 with 1 no-decision. That gives Miller a two-year cumulative total of 12-4 with 11 no-decisions in close games. [The Astros as a team were cumulatively 19-5 in Miller's close-game starts.] Oswalt in one-run games was 2-1 with 5 no-decisions in 2001; in 2002, he was 4-2 with 6 no-decisions. In two-run games, he was 3-0 with 1 no-decision in 2001; in 2002, he was 2-3. That makes Oswalt a cumulative 11-6 with 12 no-decisions. [The Astros as a team were cumulatively 14-15 in Oswalt's close-game starts.] As far as batting average in the late innings is concerned, in 2001, teams hit .354 against Miller on pitches 76-90, .253 on pitches 91-105, and .097 on pitches 106-20. In 2002, teams hit .218 against Miller on pitches 76-90, .255 on pitches 91-105, and .077 on pitches 106-20. Thus, Miller improved his BAA figure in the sixth inning in 2002 from what it was in 2001 and remained tough in the seventh and eighth innings, too. By comparison, in 2001, teams hit .373 against Oswalt on pitches 76-90, .194 on pitches 91-105, and .235 on pitches 106-20. In 2002, teams hit .239 against Oswalt on pitches 76-90, .295 on pitches 91-105, and .303 on pitches 106-20. Oswalt got tougher to hit in the sixth inning in 2002, but slipped backward in the seventh inning from his rookie season and continued to be vulnerable in the eighth inning. I discounted for both men the ninth inning, pitches 121-135, since neither man reaches that point very often.

The argument for keeping Miller in the # 1 slot boils down to Miller's having greater stamina in the late going. There's nothing that says Oswalt can't develop better stamina himself, of course, in 2003, but until he does, his late-game performances bear watching, even if fans (or the Astros themselves) put him in the # 1 spot this season. Normally, there are numerous off-days and rainouts in April, so a team--even a good one--does not necessarily have to have a # 1 pitcher established by then. But by May, rotations will have been adjusted. Injuries will have begun to take hold on clubs, too, so that the theoretical purity of matchups # 1 to # 1, # 2 to # 2, and so on cannot be maintained. In the late summer and early fall, however, the performance of a # 1 starter is often critical. The Astros are fortunate to have two starters who may truly be considered # 1-quality pitchers, so no matter who takes the # 1 slot and the start on Opening Day, the Astros figure to be in excellent shape. In close games, however, up until this year, Miller rates an edge. The Astros seem to play better in his close games than in Oswalt's. Oswalt's higher projected win total for 2003 is predicated on his filling the # 2 spot and on continued good run support.

The Astros have already begun to answer some of the questions about the 3-4-5 spots in the rotation with their announcement that Peter Munro and Kirk Saarloos will be battling for a bullpen spot. Since I had projected Munro as the fifth starter, I suppose that makes me 0-1 before the season even starts but, in this matter as in so many others, it is better to do right than to be right. If it turns out that the Astros are stronger with Redding or Fernandez or Robertson starting and Munro or Saarloos relieving, I shall be happy. My forecast for the year has not changed. I suggested in Part Two that the lower portion of the rotation would undergo some changes as the year went along, and I figure that several men may contribute to whatever win total the Astros get out of spot # 5. On a more optimistic note, though, it also bears repeating that if Tim Redding wins the # 5 job and takes hold of the task as well as the club hopes, Houston's win total could be higher than I think it will be.

Projections

In April, the Astros open up with three at home against Colorado. I have Miller and Oswalt picking up wins against Jason Jennings and Denny Neagle, with Shane Reynolds struggling and losing against Shawn Chacon in game three. A big early-season series follows on the road against St. Louis, which will enter the season with closer Jason Isringhausen on the DL. Brian Moehler figures to lose against Jason Simontacchi, and Wade Miller will likely lose a close one against Matt Morris. The Astros should rebound, however, on the next homestand, with series against the Reds and the Cards. Oswalt and Moehler should pick up wins against the Reds, while the bullpen will get its first loss of the season in Reynolds's start. Houston's fifth starter figures to open up the series with St. Louis at home, but I'm giving the projected win to the bullpen against probably Garrett Stephenson. Matt Morris will beat Miller again, but Oswalt will roll on against Woody Williams. From there, the Astros go to San Francisco for three, and I expect the bottom half of the rotation to take it on the chin. Reynolds will be 0-2 versus Livan Hernandez and Kurt Ainsworth will beat the # 5 guy. Brian Moehler will pick up his first win as an Astro in the middle game of the set. Houston next goes to Milwaukee for four games. When the Mets won the World Series in 1969, the Astros were 10-2 against 'em. Somebody asked owner Joan Payson what the Mets could do for an encore in 1970 and she said, "Beat Houston." Same deal here. I want the Astros to clock the Brewers in 2003. Miller and Oswalt should get wins in a comfortable place for them to pitch, but the bullpen will get tagged for a loss in Reynolds' start, and Moehler will lose, too. Yet, there are always surprises during the season, and the Astros will pull a big one after an off-day on the 21st headed into New York. Houston will sweep the Mets, with the fifth starter, Miller and Oswalt all winning against Mike Bacsik, Tom Glavine (who won't be quite as good as a Met), and Al Leiter. Reynolds will continue to struggle, dropping to 0-3 as the Astros go to Montreal, but Moehler and the fifth starter (I have Munro; it could be Redding) getting wins. Home vs Atlanta after an off-day on the 28th as the month's close draws near. Greg Maddux beats Miller, dropping Wade's record to 3-3 and Oswalt goes to 6-0 by whipping Hampton to end April [Record: 16-11; HR 7-4, RR 9-7]

Shane Reynolds will finally get his first win of the season by beating Atlanta's Russ Ortiz or Paul Byrd on May 1st. After that, the Astros figure to take two of three from the Marlins in Houston, with Moehler and Miller getting the wins. Pittsburgh comes into town next for four games, with Oswalt, Reynolds, and Munro/the fifth starter getting the wins. I'll bet Moehler struggles and loses game three against Jeff Suppan. The Astros take off to tough Philadelphia next. Wade Miller will lose to Kevin Millwood, dropping his record to 4-4. Trust me: Wade will be all right. Oswalt will defeat Randy Wolf, but Reynolds will lose to Vicente Padilla. With no time to lick their wounds, the Astros move into Pittsburgh and take care of business. Moehler, Miller, and the bullpen pick up wins, the latter coming in for Oswalt. The Phillies swing into Houston next, and the Astros will still have trouble with 'em. Reynolds will beat Padilla in a re-match, but Moehler and Munro will pick up losses. Houston will regroup, however, against St. Louis at home, taking two of three. Miller still won't be able to beat Matt Morris, but Oswalt and Reynolds will beat Williams and Brett Tomko. Chicago closes the Astros' homestand with three games. I fear Cubs pitching this season. Shawn Estes should whip Moehler; the Houston bullpen should win the middle game against Carlos Zambrano; and Kerry Wood's gonna beat Miller in game three. Houston goes immediately to St. Louis after that, and the bullpen gets another win in Oswalt's start against Woody Williams. Tomko beats Reynolds in a re-match, but Moehler gets over on Simontacchi to avenge his earlier loss. The Astros are off on May 29th, and I have a feeling they might skip over Munro or the other fifth starter headed into the road trip to Chicago which ends the month and leads us to June. If the move to get an Astro ace up against Kerry Wood is made, it won't do any good. Wood will clock Wade Miller again, but Oswalt will out-duel Mark Prior to put the finishing touches on another good month. [Record: 17-12 HR 17-11; RR 16-12]

Matt Clement figures to beat Reynolds in the final game of the series in Chicago to open June. The Astros will then take a day off before interleague play begins for 2003. If the Astros can't do some damage against Baltimore and Tampa Bay at home, they'll be in real trouble. But I think Houston will be all right against both. Moehler and Wade Miller should pick up wins against the Orioles, bringing them one game over and one game under .500 respectively. I haven't a clue about whom the D-Rays will start in their games in the next series, but with Oswalt, Miller, and Moehler the probables for our guys, it won't make any difference: an Astros sweep. The win for Oswalt will make him 11-0--a highly improbable record even for a projection, but I repeat what I implied in Part Two of the Preview: I just don't figure the man's gonna lose this year. Headed into what should be a glittering series on the road against the Yankees, I expect the Astros to be up and ready. Munro/the fifth starter should lose to Jeff Weaver; Wade Miller, though, will hump it up and get back to .500 at 7-7 by beating Mike Mussina. If the Astros' rotation and the Yankees' rotation both hold to the form I set up, Oswalt will face Andy Pettite in front of a capacity crowd and probably a national TV audience. Pettite will pin the first loss of the season on Oswalt, which will appear to deflate the Astros headed into Boston, the next stop on the road trip. But not so. Houston will rebound and take the series from the Red Sox. Reynolds will lose to Tim Wakefield, dropping his record to 5-7. If that happens, it will cause a buzz of concern for Shane in the clubhouse and among management. The bullpen will get a win in the Moehler-Fossum matchup that follows, and in game three, Jimy Williams makes a move. At this point in the year, I had Munro struggling to a 3-6 record after his loss to Jeff Weaver of the Yankees, in part because he couldn't handle the everyday pitching load of a starter. I figured that by now Williams would turn to Redding as the club's fifth starter. If Redding wins the job outright in ST and produces wins like he can, the Astros could win about four more games than I expect. But, even if Redding does win the fifth spot in ST, it's still quite possible that Williams will have to make some other kind of move around this time of the season. It happened in 1998 with Pete Schourek; it happened in 2001 with Dave Mlicki. In any event, I have projected Redding (or some other new guy, perhaps) moving into the rotation and winning game three against the Red Sox. Houston then goes home and takes two of three from the D-Backs. RJ and Wade Miller tangle in game one, leading to a bullpen loss, but Oswalt beats Shilling and Reynolds beats Elmer Dessens. At Texas, however, the 4-5-1 guys struggle against that powerful Ranger lineup. Moehler and Redding lose, but Miller beats Chan-Ho Park to go 8-7. After that, protect your children from foul language. The Astros will fly into Phoenix and wonder what in the world went wrong after the D-Backs sweep 'em. Shilling, Dessens, and Batista will beat Oswalt, Reynolds, and Moehler. The Astros will need every bit of their off-day on the 26th to recover. Fortunately, Houston figures to get a bit of revenge at home against the Rangers to close the month, although truthfully I'd rather see the club play Tampa Bay again. The bullpen will lose game one. (The Astros are not all that good a team in opening a homestand after a road trip.) But Wade Miller will continue to find his rhythm and Oswalt will remain a nearly-unbeatable force as June ends. [Record: 13-12 HR 26-14; RR 20-21]

The Astros will sweep Milwaukee at home to open July and go on the road to take two of three from Pittsburgh as a follow-up accomplishment, with the bullpen losing the final game. Houston has a chance this month, with a lot of home games, to bust a move in the NL Central, but that might not happen. The Reds may not be able to pitch but they can hit, and I look for a split of the four-game set they have in Houston early in July. The bullpen will get tagged with a loss, dropping its cumulative record to a still-good 7-6 and Bruce Chen will beat Redding, but Miller and Oswalt will win the next two games to rescue things. Houston stays at home in the next series and will sweep the Pirates, Reynolds, Moehler, and Redding picking up the wins that take the Astros to the All-Star Break with a 55-39 record. After the break, Houston hits the road to Cincy, and will fight to split four games. Miller will beat Danny Graves in game one and the bullpen will bail out Brian Moehler in his matchup with Paul Wilson, but in between Oswalt will suffer his third loss of the season and Ryan Dempster will defeat Shane Reynolds, whose record will fall to 7-10. The Astros historically have shown an ability to bounce back after adversity, though, and the two road games at Pittsburgh following the Reds series should be wins. Redding will move to 4-2 and Miller to 13-7. From there, Houston goes to Milwaukee and will split two games. Oswalt will get win # 16, but Todd Ritchie will beat Shane Reynolds. Despite his 7-11 record, it will be a blessing if Reynolds keeps his health and stays in the rotation. In the actual season, he might have gone on and come off the DL by now, but if he is healthy from the start of ST as he says he is, there's little reason to believe he can't give the Astros some innings and some wins. It's home for Chicago, where the Cubs will rudely take two of three from Houston. Moehler's record drops to 9-8; the bullpen's to 8-7, but wonder of wonders, Miller finally will beat Kerry Wood to salvage the finale. A road trip to that beautifully-cool place called Atlanta will close out July. Greg Maddux will take the measure of Oswalt in game one, but Reynolds will outpitch Russ Ortiz in game two, providing a bigger lift than you might expect, both for him and the team. The Moehler-Byrd matchup will go to the pen, and the 'stros relievers will lose. [Record: 16-11 HR 34-19; RR 28-27]

Sweltering conditions will probably await the Astros in Miami as play begins in August and, given the historical toughness of Pro Player Stadium as a venue for Houston, I look for no more than one win in this series, with Miller beating A.J. Burnett in the middle game. That means that both Redding and Oswalt will have lost. Some ground can be recovered, however, if as I expect the Astros take two of three back in Houston from the Mets. In that series finale, after Houston wins the first two, I have little idea who the Mets' fifth starter might be, but the Mets always manage to clock Houston in the Astros' home park when I least expect it, and 2003 should be no different. Yet, keep in mind the bounce-back factor. The Astros' best--Miller, Oswalt, and Reynolds--projects to tangle with the Expos' best--Junior Vazquez, Orlando Hernandez, and Tony Armas, Jr.--and I think the Astros will sweep 'em. The Houston offense should be percolating around this time as Houston makes its seemingly-annual August push toward the top of the Central or of the Wild Card standings. The trip to Chicago which follows, though, ain't gonna be a picnic. While we can always hope for better outcomes, if Chicago's pitching is as good as it figures to be, the Cubs will take three out of four. The only bright spot: Oswalt beats Prior to go 18-5. Houston will recover a little bit as the road trip continues by banging their way past the Reds two out of three. Reynolds will fall to 10-12, but Moehler will improve to a surprising 11-9 and Redding squares his record (assuming no earlier wins in April and May) at 5-5. The Cubs travel to Houston next, and the Astros, with a lot on the line, are ready for 'em. Miller loses to Wood, but Oswalt and Reynolds pick up wins, with Reynolds besting Matt Clement to go 11-12. Reynolds's record is still under .500, but he's giving the Astros some wins and a fair number of innings as he finds a groove when the team needs him most. The Reds will provide their second bump in the road for the Astros by coming into Houston after the Cubs leave and taking two of three. Moehler will lose to Paul Wilson (assuming Wilson is still the Reds' fourth starter this deep into the year), and the bullpen will drop the next one, too, to go 8-9. But Wade Miller, fully righted from his early-season rocky start, will win the third game to go 17-9. The Dodgers make their only visit to Houston following the Reds and, if the matchups go the way I project, Houston should win two of three, with Moehler's loss dropping his record to 11-11. But the bright side of this is really bright: Oswalt will have won his twentieth game, and Reynolds will have pulled his record up to .500. The San Diego Padres close the long twelve-game homestand and the month of August itself with a trio of games. If it turns out that Francisco Cordova is the Padres' fifth starter this season, I care not what his record is at this point. He'll beat Redding to open that series, but Miller and Oswalt will keep churning and help Houston take the next two in preparation for the always-tough month of September. [Record: 16-12 HR 44-24; RR 32-33]

The last month, one hopes with the Astros firmly leading either the Central or the Wild Card hunt by now, begins in LA. The Dodgers will likely be in a fight of their own with the Diamondbacks and the Giants. Reynolds will win the opener, but LA, good club that they are, will pin losses on Moehler and the bullpen. That wouldn't be a good development headed into San Diego, the next stop. In 2002, you'll recall, the Astros made a stop in SD at this time and didn't fare so well, but Houston will be improved this season and will take the series here, two games to one. Miller will go to 19-9 and Reynolds will hit his high-water mark of 14-12, but the bullpen will lose one for Oswalt in the middle game. Four games in Milwaukee end the ten-game road trip. As long as it's cool and not cold, Houston should survive to split the series. Oswalt will have trouble in cool conditions, though, and so will Tim Redding before him, as Dave Mlicki will jump up and bite his old team. It'll be up to Moehler and Miller, who'll win his twentieth by beating Ben Sheets, to keep the Astros even. Houston will head home after that for three with the Cardinals. The back-end of the Astros' rotation might fare better against the Cardinals in 2003. Then again, it might not. Houston's offense will likely pound Brett Tomko, but the Redbirds will do damage to Reynolds, too, sending the game to the 'pen, where Houston will win. St. Louis, which will patch its pitching staff together well enough to be right there with the Cubs and Astros, will bounce back to win the next two, defeating Moehler and Redding. Moehler will end the season with a 12-13 record. Not great, but not too bad out of the fourth spot, but this loss, if it happens here, will come at a bad time. A stung group of Astros will then face a hard trip to Colorado. Most optimistically, we can hope that Jeff Kent transforms the Houston lineup into a juggernaut that will outslug even the Rockies in their home ballpark, but more likely, Miller and Reynolds will lose games there. Oswalt, who doesn't care where he pitches, will tolerate the cooler, drier air of Denver and pick up win # 22. The road portion of the schedule closes with three in St. Louis. Look for this to be a tough tight series. The Astros project to have the 4-5-1 spots going, and I figure the first two games will be decided by the bullpen, a win and a loss. In game three, Miller loses to Matt Morris to drop to 20-11. Houston closes the 2003 season with seven at home. The first three are with the Giants. Oswalt will finish the year at 23-6 by beating Kirk Rueter, but the veteran Livan Hernandez will edge Reynolds, who'll end the year at 14-14. The Damian Moss-Brian Moehler matchup has BP written all over it because of the way these clubs can hit, but Houston's 'pen will win. The final four contests are with the Brewers, who by this time will have brought up some rookies. Yet, because I can do nothing else, I have projected a Redding win against Dave Mlicki to push Tim's final record to 6-8. Ben Sheets will spring up and out-pitch Miller in game two, as Wade ends the year 20-12. But the bullpen finishes strong for the Astros in the final two games, picking up for both Oswalt and Reynolds, and records a cumulative 13-12 mark for the season. [Record: 13-13 HR 52-29; RR 39-42]

The Astros will finish the season 91-71. Whether that record will be good enough to win the NL Central Division, I do not know, but it might. St. Louis looks weaker right now than it did a season ago, and the Cubs, even if they get terrific pitching, are going to have to get markedly-increased production from five spots in the order to mount a sustained challenge in the race. A 91-71 record should at least keep the Astros in range of the Wild Card if they cannot win the division.

The improvement over 2002's 84-78 mark comes from having Jeff Kent in the lineup behind Berkman and Bagwell and ahead of Hidalgo (worth about two wins), having Shane Reynolds in the rotation all season (two more wins), having more stability in the # 4 spot in the rotation (one more win), better OF defense (one additional win), and having a fresher bullpen (one more win). Looking at the projection as a whole, it's possible that the Astros will do better on the road than I think they will. It's also possible that Tim Redding will do better than 6-8, but he'll have to prove it to me. These two situations, the road record and Redding's record, could wind up being linked. If Redding takes a grip on the # 5 slot and gets ten wins, I can see Houston winning 95 games. It's possible that I have been too optimistic in regard to Reynolds, but he's a good vet, and if he's healthy, it;s hard not to credit him with double-digit wins. Certainly, I have been optimistic in regard to Oswalt--surely, too optimistic--but the man is a fine pitcher and I really do think he'll have a great 2003 season.

If I have been too optimistic in some respects and not optimistic enough in others, I've tried to strike a balance. I predicted the Astros would win 96 games in 2002 but the club fell well short of that mark. So this year, I've tried to err on the conservative side. The Astros because of Kent and because of deeper, more serviceable starting pitching, will be better than they were. How much better cannot really be said. But 91-71 seems a reasonable estimate for this group until players like Redding and Richard Hidalgo show us, perhaps by late May or early June, that they are or are not ready and able to step up and fill two of the big gaps that were present in last year's team. On paper--and only on paper--the production of these two men looks like it could spell the difference between the Astros being a solid contender for the NL championship or a team that comes up just short of that goal and expectation.

To close this 2003 Astros Season Preview, I'd like to answer a couple of questions that were raised after Part Two was posted. I did not use Bill James's Pythagorean Formula in figuring the Astros' expected wins. That formula is a fine tool, but it doesn't handle one-run games very well. The Astros were 18-25 in one-run games in 2002 and must improve that figure in 2003 (especially against the Cardinals) if they hope to contend. I figure that Houston will improve somewhat in one-run games in 2003, but not to the degree that would lead us to project a Pythagorean win total of 101 games. As far as the Astros' team ERA is concerned, my figure of 3.47 (3.50 for round figures) is probably too low a figure. Ricky Stone may get down to that ERA of 3.30 I have for him if he is not used as much, but then again, he may not. And Peter Munro's ERA of 4.01 as a projected starter was probably too low a figure, too for a 3-6 record. The good news for him is that if he wins a long man's job in the 'pen, his ERA just might be lower than 4.00 if he has a good year. None of this ERA adjustment, though, necessarily affects one-run or two-run games. The Astros could have a decent team ERA (3.50-3.75) and still do poorly in one-run games. (For one example of how low overall ERA and high expected wins don't always correlate, see my comments about Oswalt's late-game stats, above.) The Pythagorean formula is frequently off by a handful of games in many seasons for a variety of reasons, and although it is useful as a projecting device, I'm not willing to adhere to it as a true sabrmetrician might. I'll stick to my more conservative, and admittedly more intuitive, forecast of 91 wins for the Astros, with an outside possibility of 95 wins.

Concerning another question, how rare was Lance Berkman's 128-RBI season in 2002? Pretty rare. On the All-Time Single-Season RBI lists that one can find at Baseball-Reference.com and in Total Baseball, RBI in the 190s has been achieved once; the 180s twice; the 170s six times; the 160s twelve times; the 150s, twenty-one times; the 140s, 57 times; and 139 five times as of the year 2001. These numbers take up the top 100 single-season run producers. Berkman's output was just below that lowest record-book range--a very fine year, and one that just hasn't happened that often in 133 years.

Yet, some readers were surprised when I predicted a decline in Berkman's RBI in 2003. That prediction was partly intuitive, based on many years of watching baseball. Even great players endure declines after great seasons and declines cumulatively over their careers. Nonetheless, we can and should ask, how true is that intuitive judgment? To find out, I studied the list of the top RBI men in baseball history, and constructed a table out of what I found. Despite great effort over the past several days, I cannot post the entire 100-man list, as I had planned, but I can summarize what I found:

In the 1919 cumulative seasons played by the All-Time RBI leaders, 879 of those seasons were years in which the hitters' RBI production declined from it had been in the season before, or approximately 46% of the time. Of those 879 declines, 519, or 59%, occured from the age of 30 onward. There were 563 cumulative seasons of 100 or more RBI. Hitters declined from that production in the following year 370 times, or approximately 66% of the time.

There is even greater consistency than you might imagine on this list as well. Of the 100 players on the All-Time Career RBI List, 73 had declines in fewer than half of the seasons of their careers, a total number we might expect to be so high given the excellent run production of these players.

Despite the fact that so many players incurred declines in less than 50% of the seasons they played, the table reveals, I believe, two things: first, even the most prodigious RBI man will suffer a decline following a productive year nearly half the time; second, there is a rough correlation between age and RBI production, and between age and the decline of high RBI production.

Every name on the list is a standout player. Even so, several names stand out more than others. Babe Ruth declined from what he had done the year before 11 times in his 22 seasons, so he didn't make the "cut" as far as being one of those who had few declines is concerned. But keep in mind that Ruth was often declining from some incredible numbers: from 164 RBI to 142 RBI in 1927-28, from 154 RBI to 153 in 1929-30. That situation holds true for several players. The drop may be only one RBI, but it still counts as a decline. In my mind, I usually think of Ty Cobb as a singles hitter, but as his RBI figure shows, he was more than that. Yet, even so great a hitter declined 14 times over his long career. Al Simmons had 12 100-RBI seasons, including 11 in a row at the start of his career, but stil declined 13 times in 20 seasons.

I am *astounded* by what Jimmie Foxx did: 13 100-RBI seasons, and only six times did Foxx decline the next year from what he had done previously.

Lou Gehrig is even better than Foxx: 13 100-RBI seasons in a row, and only 7 times did he decline the next year.

Who comes out better on this list than you might think? Take a look at the following names: Banks, Baylor, Bottomley and Lave Cross, a 19th century ballplayer. Nap Lajoie and Eddie Murray were every bit as steady as it appeared they were. So was Carlton Fisk, with only 9 declines in 24 seasons, although his total RBI figure is significantly lower than these others. Ron Santo surprised me in being on the RBI list in the first place and in doing so well to maintain a high standard within it: 15 seasons and only 6 declines in RBI production. Ted Simmons deserves greater consideration for the HOF than he has gotten: only 8 declines in a 21-year career. Rusty Staub developed from a local Houston hero to a hitter of national reputation: 23 seasons, 9 declines. Albert Belle was tremendous. And among the contemporary ballplayers, Rafael Palmiero is unbelievable--an RBI machine, with only 6 declines in 17 years, 9 100-RBI seasons with only four declines the following year.

The table also reveals that a player doesn't have to be a home-run hitter, a 100-RBI man, or even a particularly steady run producer to make an impact. Catcher Mickey Vernon declined 12 times in his career, including 8 from age 30 on, and still managed to earn 1311 RBI in 20 seasons. All some players need is a smidgen of big-league talent, good health, and time.

There's another dimension to the data that's worth looking at: age range. Berkman from the ages of 24-26 has increased his RBI number from the previous season in all three years. How does that accomplishment compare to those within the same age range among the All-Time RBI leaders? It puts him in a very small class. Only these names out of the top 100 maintained similar rising production over that short span: Connor, Cross, Beckley, Ruth, Hornsby, Gehringer, Billy Williams, Nettles, Baylor, Bonds. Forty-four of the top 100, however, did manage to increase their RBI production at age 27 from what it had been the previous year, the age Berkman will be this season. Those that had both rising production and an increase from age 26 to 27: only Lave Cross and Billy Williams.

There was good reason, then, to suggest that Berkman and Kent might suffer RBI declines (slight though they may be) in 2003. History seems to support such a belief. But there's reason to hope, as well: no law of physics or statistics says Berkman can't be one of those relatively-few players who has a fabulous season at age 27. Yastrzemski did; so did George Foster. And there's no law that says Jeff Kent can't have a monster year in Houston beyond anyone's expectations. He's found a run-producing stroke fairly late in his career and has not declined too often from his RBI-high years. But the cumulative weight of history makes it improbable that either player will exceed last year's totals.