Stupid little survey...

[pots]

Bring day at work...

Nice surprises, pick one(or more):
1) Ensberg of 2005 - 35+ hrs and 300+ avg.
2) Jennings was a steal - 20 wins, 3.2 era or less
3) Albers rules - 12+ wins, < 4.00 ERA
4) Sampson rules - 12+ wins, < 4.00 ERA
5) Moehler doesn't suck - 12+ wins, < 4.00 ERA
6) Nieve rules - 12+ wins, 4.00 ERA
7) Wandy can actually pitch - 12+ win, < 4.00 ERA
Scott does it for a whole season - 35+ hrs and 310+ avg
9) Burke excels with more playing time and doesn't blow as a CFer -  300+ avg, 375+ OBP, Astros aren't in the bottom 5 in doubles and triples given up
10) Biggio regains his youth - 300 avg, min 300 ab
11) Pence gets ROY
12) All will not happen

Big busts (pick one or more):
1) Ensberg of 2006 returns - < .270 avg, < 15 hrs
2) Jennings had a career year last year - 5.00+ ERA
3) Albers gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
4) Sampson gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
5) Moehler gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
6) Nieve gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
7) Wandy gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
Biggio deteriates greatly - < .240 avg, < 15 hrs
9) Luke's September was sign pitchers figured him out - < .270 avg, < 20 hrs
10) Burke can't handle CF - he isn't starting there in July
11) Pence gets called up but is sent back down due to lack of production(at any point of the season)
12) Nobody fails this badly

[pots]

My answer...
4) Sampson rules - 12+ wins, < 4.00 ERA
He may not get the call out of the gate, but I think he could pull this off.

2) Jennings was a steal - 20 wins, 3.2 era or less
Just looking at the stat line, it seemed as though he improved in his second start of the spring.  First start he got 4 of 6 outs in the air, second(after settling down), got just 1 of 9 outs in the air.  He seems like a real heady pitcher that will strive well in a home park that has its pluses and minuses for a pitcher.


As for the bust:
Wandy, the pressure will be too much to bare, he's gone by July after a stint in the pen fails as well.


Just some spring thoughts.

[Foghorn]

Quote:
Bring day at work...

Nice surprises, pick one(or more):
1) Ensberg of 2005 - 35+ hrs and 300+ avg.
2) Jennings was a steal - 20 wins, 3.2 era or less
3) Albers rules - 12+ wins, < 4.00 ERA
4) Sampson rules - 12+ wins, < 4.00 ERA
5) Moehler doesn't suck - 12+ wins, < 4.00 ERA
6) Nieve rules - 12+ wins, 4.00 ERA
7) Wandy can actually pitch - 12+ win, < 4.00 ERA
Scott does it for a whole season - 35+ hrs and 310+ avg
9) Burke excels with more playing time and doesn't blow as a CFer -  300+ avg, 375+ OBP, Astros aren't in the bottom 5 in doubles and triples given up
10) Biggio regains his youth - 300 avg, min 300 ab
11) Pence gets ROY
12) All will not happen

Big busts (pick one or more):
1) Ensberg of 2006 returns - < .270 avg, < 15 hrs
2) Jennings had a career year last year - 5.00+ ERA
3) Albers gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
4) Sampson gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
5) Moehler gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
6) Nieve gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
7) Wandy gets chance and fails - 50 minimum innings, 6.5+ ERA
Biggio deteriates greatly - < .240 avg, < 15 hrs
9) Luke's September was sign pitchers figured him out - < .270 avg, < 20 hrs
10) Burke can't handle CF - he isn't starting there in July
11) Pence gets called up but is sent back down due to lack of production(at any point of the season)
12) Nobody fails this badly

I think one of the 4/5 guys will have a good year (10+ wins and an ERA of under 4.50).

I think Ensberg has a nice year (if healthy).  

I think Scott does a reasonable facsimile of the 2006 Luke Scott--280/340/500.

I think the Jakes fucking suck!!!!