02-05-2010, 10:05 AM
<!--quoteo(post=78677:date=Feb 5 2010, 06:42 AM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ Feb 5 2010, 06:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->On paper, the 2010 Cubs look worse than the 2009 Cubs at the start of the season. I would like to hear anyone debate that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Using career numbers, no. Using 2009 offensive ouput, the 2010 Cubs do look better (Bradley out, Byrd in; Baker/Fontenot instead of Miles/Fontenot). Pitching-wise, the exit of Harden is almost negated by the exit of Gregg. So one could argue, using the 2009 numbers, the Cubs have slightly improved (not that I would use that as an argument).
Using career numbers, no. Using 2009 offensive ouput, the 2010 Cubs do look better (Bradley out, Byrd in; Baker/Fontenot instead of Miles/Fontenot). Pitching-wise, the exit of Harden is almost negated by the exit of Gregg. So one could argue, using the 2009 numbers, the Cubs have slightly improved (not that I would use that as an argument).