NL West: I Love L.A.Jason Michael BarkerAs the weather in Seattle begins to turn (not sunny, mind you), I reckon it's about time to start looking ahead to the 2000 season. That means a preview article for each of MLB's six divisions, beginning today with the National League West. First, a quick recap of last year's transpirings:Last year the Diamondbacks took the baseball world by storm, surpassing expectations and winning the division in only their second year as a franchise. The Giants actually spent 76 days in first place, but didn't appear at the top of the standings after July. The Dodgers were one of the biggest disappointments in baseball, finishing below .500 despite a Kevin Brown, a new manager and a huge payroll. The Padres, as expected, lost a ton of games, but not enough to finish in last place. That distinction belonged to the Rockies, who lost 90 games and struggled to score runs away from Coors Field.5. San Diego Padres
1999 Record: 74-84 (fourth place)
Runs scored: 710 (15th in NL)
Runs allowed: 761 (6th in NL)The Padres took a huge step back last season after their World Series run in 1998, but that was to be expected given the loss of Kevin Brown, Greg Vaughn and others. It's no secret that this club is in a rebuilding mode with the ultimate goal of being competitive when they move into their new stadium in 2002. So far they've done a decent job of it, and there are some good prospects on their way up through the system as well, plus some good young pitchers who should be solid starters this year and beyond.

If they were really serious about an all-out rebuilding effort, however, wouldn't they have traded Quilvio Veras and Wally Joyner for prospects rather than Bret Boone and Ryan Klesko? It doesn't seem to me that a half-assed rebuilding effort does anyone involved any good. I do expect the Padres to turn into a decent team in the next few years -- I also expect them to lose 90 games next season.4. Colorado Rockies
1999 Record: 72-90 (fifth place)
Runs scored: 906 (2nd in NL)
Runs allowed: 1,028 (16th in NL)There's quite a bit of optimism in Denver surrounding the 2000 edition of the Rockies, thanks to a new manager, a new general manager and a slew of new players -- at the very least, new GM Dan O'Dowd seems to have a good grasp on such concepts as park effects and on-base percentage, and he was shrewd enough to trade away Vinny Castilla and Dante Bichette. He even picked up Jeff Cirillo, a great hitter and one of the more underrated players in baseball over the past couple of years.

Cutting to the chase a bit, the Rockies appear to be moving in the right direction but they're not there yet. O'Dowd, for all his good moves, also signed Tom Goodwin to a three-year contract. The jury is still out on new manager Buddy Bell, who may or may not figure out how to manage in Coors Field (hint: bunting a runner over to score a single run early in the game is a bad strategy). Finally, and this one will plague the Rockies forever, somebody has to figure out how to get some decent pitching out of the Colorado hurlers. O'Dowd wasn't hired for a quick fix and the team was pretty bad when he arrived, so it might be two or three years before we begin to see results.3. San Francisco Giants
1999 Record: 86-76 (second place)
Runs scored: 872 (3rd in NL)
Runs allowed: 831 (9th in NL)Dusty Baker deserves some credit, because it seems that every year he pushes the Giants to more wins than their talent might indicate -- despite playing half their games in a very good pitcher's park and losing Barry Bonds for two months, the Giants still managed to finish third in the league in runs scored. There was also some promise on the other side of the ball, particularly in young starters Russ Ortiz and Joe Nathan.

I think this is the year Baker's magic runs out, however. The Giants are getting older: Bonds, Jeff Kent, Ellis Burks and J.T. Snow are all on the wrong side of 32, and there isn't much help in the farm system. The rotation has potential, but Baker doesn't exactly take it easy on his pitchers. Ortiz and Shawn Estes were pushed very hard last year, and Livan Hernandez was damaged goods before he even arrived.

This is still a better club than the Rockies or Padres, even if only thanks to Bonds and Kent. Some decline should be expected, however, and the Giants look to me like a .500 team.2. Arizona Diamondbacks
1999 Record: 100-62 (first place)
Runs scored: 908 (1st in NL)
Runs allowed: 676 (3rd in NL)It's not hard to see why the Diamondbacks won 100 games last year, seeing as they led the NL in runs scored and were third in runs allowed. The key to their success, other than great pitching from Randy Johnson, were career years from Luis Gonzalez and Jay Bell, plus huge rebounds from Matt Williams and Steve Finley. It isn't all that uncommon for declining veterans to put up one more big season on their way out (see Fred McGriff last year), but for all four players to have them at the same time should be chalked up to nothing more than dumb luck. Needless to say, don't expect any of them to repeat in 2000.

Even with a big offensive decline, the Diamondbacks still have enough pitching to be a very good team. Johnson, Brian Anderson and Omar Daal are three-fifths of a good rotation, Todd Stottlemyre should be good for around 180 innings next season, and there are certainly worse fifth starters than Armando Reynoso. A full season of Matt Mantei closing games is a big boost as well.

Still, I simply can't bring myself to pick the D-Backs to repeat in the NL West next season. I don't expect them to fall off the proverbial cliff, but anything more than around 88 or 90 wins seems a stretch given the anticipated offensive decline.1. Los Angeles Dodgers
1999 Record: 77-85 (third place)
Runs scored: 793 (11th in NL)
Runs allowed: 787 (8th in NL)That's right, the Dodgers. I picked them last year and I'm picking them again in 2000. It's not so much that I expect them to take the baseball world by storm; rather, this is a fairly weak division and 90 wins just might be enough to make the postseason. Where, I can hear you asking, are the Dodgers going to pick up 13 games on what they did last season? I'm glad you asked.

For one, Adrian Beltre is set to explode. His numbers last season, at his age and in Dodger Stadium, have superstar written all over them. Shawn Green's on-base ability will be an improvement over Raul Mondesi, although Green's raw numbers will take a hit due to Dodger Stadium. Eric Karros seems to be peaking later in his career than players normally do, and while some decline might be in order, I don't expect him to slip as much as a player his age might normally. Todd Hundley can only get better, both at the plate and behind it. Gary Sheffield is great every year, and 2000 should be no different.

On the other side of the ball, Kevin Brown is, well, Kevin Brown. I expect Chan Ho Park to bounce back from a sub-par 1999; ditto Darren Dreifort. Rookie Eric Gagne is a huge improvement over what the Dodgers had last year, although the fifth starter spot appears up for grabs.

The Dodgers are far from a sure thing in 2000, and they have some question marks to be certain. But similar to Dusty Baker taking the Giants beyond their talent in past years, Davey Johnson (a better manager than Baker anyway) will lead the blue and white back to the post-season in a weak NL West.

about the author

Jason Michael Barker believes there's no good reason why pneumatic tubes can't shoot hot dogs to your seat. Offer a solution to the conundrum of high-pressure mustard at jmb@strikethree.com.