Not Any Time Soon

Common guys, remember when the Phillies got Halliday we were all saying how they would dominate the division for years? Didn't happen, and they haven't won any WS with him yet.. How about the Red Sox? After all those big name acquisitions look at what a disaster that turned out to be over the past 2 years with those "stars"  How about the Marlins after the moves they made last offseason, how'd that turn out for them?

Sure the Braves and the Nats are setup well right now or seem to be, but anything can happen over the next 2-3 years if they become a hurt or a disfunctional team for whatever developing reason.

I'm totally disagreeing with the thought that the Mets won't compete until 2018. My guess is that the Braves will be good(don't know how good but better than .500) for the next 3 years max before they run into some kind of big problem of some kind with their key players. Same thing with the Nats, they'll most likely be good for another 2 or 3 years but I wouldn't bet beyond that.

Mets... will be playoff contenders before 2016, I truly believe that. I could be wrong but I have just as much of a chance at being right as the doom and gloom until 2018 people do of being wrong considering we're mostly gambling on top prospects to pan out.

This year, obviously the Mets will not be getting too far, that's as far as I'll go predicting negativity.

Yogi, surprised you're being this negative looking into the future, its usually something you don't do often, just try to quit the negativity and ignorance of looking into a fake crystal ball and forcasting doom over the next half decade.

And back on these dominant teams (on paper going into the season at least) everyone likes to knee-jerk forecast will be big winners...  

We know about some of the teams last year many people were in awe about going into the season because of the moves they made.. and how many thought they would be atop their divisions or winning titles..  Miami, Philadelphia, Arizona, LA Angels, even Boston still... All of them struck out.

Let's take a look this year at some of the teams projected to dominate or win divisions, wild cards..  Atlanta, Toronto, Washington, Cincinatti, LA Dodgers, LA Angels... Now, I'm not gonna lie to you, I'm probably just as much of a fool as last year and I'll predict each of these teams to win their divisions this year because of the moves they made or whatever, but I know its not gonna turn out all that well for all of them.  Maybe only about half of them will win their divisions or wild cards or amount of games as expected.

So if we have a tough time each year predicting the October results from the start of each season, then we definitely can't predict what's gonna happen 2-3 years from now or how good teams that look good on paper now will be then.

There's absolutely no better example than experts' predictions every season.  Yes, we know baseball a whole lot better than your average fan on this board, but for experts it's their job.  I didn't read a ton of predictions last year, but who had Oakland and Baltimore in the playoffs?

Heck just check out Baseball Prospectus, a very good source:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/a
rticle.php?articleid=16245

That's one example, but we all know what the predictions were going in and every year has the same 50/50 kind of results from all experts.  

Prospects surprise all the time and move quickly through a system, careers take an unexpected downturn all the time.  Let's take it year by year.

Common guys, remember when the Phillies got Halliday we were all saying how they would dominate the division for years? Didn't happen, and they haven't won any WS with him yet..ATW

ATW...you can have Halladay, Lee, and Hamels and I will take one of these two lists...

Minor, Beachy, Venters, Kimbrel, Freeman, Heyward, Simmons, Medlen, Walden, Teheran, Justin Upton

Strasburg, Zimmermann, Gonzalez, Storen, Clippard, Detweiler, Ramos, Desmond, Espinosa, Zimmerman, Harper, Span...

These two rosters are loaded with 29 and under players and built for distance...

I do agree someone with MrBMG that the days of big-name free agents might be gone for a while.  There might not be any more players like Santana, Beltran, Delgado and the like...but there's no reason there might not be some mid-range free agents here within the next year or so.  There's no reason to think that a mid-range free agent couldn't help this team a lot.

That's why I agree with ATW about Bourn being the perfect pickup right now....thomasam

You hit the nail on the head with the mid range FA comment thomas but, I don't see Bourn as a mid level guy at $15 million a year.
Why would you want to pay out $45 million for the next three years when the team probably will not make the playoffs during that time...they have already laid out all of that money for Wright and he will be at least 34 by the time they are ready for a serious run at a ring...I would rather bring in guys that are truly mid level and build the team the right way...

Look at this list of players that they brought in during the mid 80's:
 
 Wagner, Floyd, Beltran, Pedro Martinez, Glavine, Cameron, LoDuca, Valentin, Delgado, Nady, Endy Chavez, Julio Franco, Offerman, Mientkiewicz, Shawn Green, Ramon Castro, Steve Trachsel, Moises Alou, and Marlon Anderson added to the young players like Wright, Reyes, Heilman, Gomez, Maine, Joe Smith, Feliciano, Victor Diaz, Mike Jacobs, Bell, Ring, and others...all of these additions were not stars but, they all played a part in the team's success for the winning years from 2005-2008 when the Mets, coming off of 3 very bad years, won 357 games, lost 291 games..

That was a winning formula and it can be again....

Wagner, Floyd, Beltran, Pedro Martinez, Glavine, Cameron, LoDuca, Valentin, Delgado, Nady, Endy Chavez, Julio Franco, Offerman, Mientkiewicz, Shawn Green, Ramon Castro, Steve Trachsel, Moises Alou, and Marlon Anderson added to the young players like Wright, Reyes, Heilman, Gomez, Maine,Joe Smith, Feliciano, Victor Diaz, Mike Jacobs, Bell, Ring, and others...all of these additions were not stars but, they all played a part in the team's success for the winning years from 2005-2008 when theMets, coming off of 3 very bad years, won 357 games, lost 291 games..

Obviously you mean the mid-2000s but your point is valid.  It's a mix of youth and veterans, and that seems to be the plan this time around.  Of course te last time around most of those young players didn't work out, but Wright, Reyes and (briefly) Smith and Maine did.  

This time though really could be like the 80s...maybe.  You look at 80-83 that was one sad team.  2002-2004 was also really bad, but at least the team just had a successful stretch beforehand.  In 1983 it had been nearly 10 years since they were even over .500.

Every era is different, but that basic framework can be effective again.

As far as mid-levels go I agree with Bourn but I would use him as the exception because filling that CF role is so difficult.  The corners are a lot easier and production can be had for the $5MM - $8MM range. 

Minor, Beachy, Venters, Kimbrel, Freeman, Heyward, Simmons, Medlen, Walden, Teheran, Justin Upton

Strasburg, Zimmermann, Gonzalez, Storen, Clippard, Detweiler, Ramos, Desmond, Espinosa, Zimmerman, Harper, Span...

Those are both great lists of young players, but there are two huge unknowns:  will they pan out, and if they do will both teams break the bank payroll-wise to keep them intact?  You just never know.

The list of players that have started off looking like all-stars and have flamed out is huge.  Are we seeing it with Lincecum now?  Maybe.  We saw it with Dontrelle Willis, Kerry Wood, and a host of other young phenoms.  We might be seeing it in Boston with their stable of mid-20s pitchers.  There's just no way to predict the unpredictable.

This is just going to be a really interesting year.  Probably not a real successful one on the diamond but maybe a successful one around it.