Rebuild, Year 2

It may be too soon to tell when the Cubs will be ready to compete year after year, which is the goal of the new administration, but I like how the rebuild is going.

It's safe to say this year will be better than the last. The 61-101 record was deceptive - at no time did the Cubs play like a 101-loss team. They were a 90-loss team before the deadline trades and a 115-loss team after them, but unless you're in the running for a playoff spot, your win-loss record is irrelevant.

Playing for pride sounds good on paper - it might have been nice to avoid a 100-loss season - but if you're rebuilding your franchise, there's no point in keeping players who aren't part of the long-term plan. Get what you can, for whomever you can, while you can. Hope that your Doyle Alexander can bring you somebody's unknown John Smoltz.

One of the major benefits of not competing is that the Cubs were able to give some of their young talent a good look at the major league level. We saw that Brett Jackson and Josh Vitters weren't ready to face big-league pitching everyday, but Anthony Rizzo is. We saw that Jeff Samardzija could make the transition from reliever to starter.

At the very least, three of the eight daily starters are in place, and all are all-star caliber.

Starlin Castro has been there before. I'm not sold on turning him into a middle-lineup hitter just yet, but last year provided the opportunity to try new things with someone who led the league in hits at age 21. His defense continues to improve, as well as his attention span, and I like his range. He's locked down for a good long time, and I'm looking forward to him becoming the Cubs' version of Derek Jeter with better wheels and more doubles and triples. Driving in 78 runs in 2012 is a nice total considering how many opportunities he had, but I see him more as the one being driven in rather than the one who puts the numbers on the scoreboard.

Darwin Barney won his first gold glove last year while setting a league record for consecutive errorless games at second base. He won't hit like Ryne Sandberg, but stellar defense like his will save a lot of runs in the long term. He's a few years older than the guys on either side of him, but at 27 he's not exactly long in the tooth and will remain an inexpensive key to the everyday lineup. As he and Castro continue to play side by side every day, their instincts in relation to where the other will be on double-play balls will only improve.

Anthony Rizzo is a star in the making. The Andrew Cashner trade is already looking like one of the better ones in Cubs history. In addition to showing power at a pace that could give him his first 30-homer season as early as this year and a potential lock for 100+ RBI if there are enough runners on base in front of him, I like his defense. Plus-defense at first, second and short has been a luxury even for some of the Cubs' best teams.

That sets 3/4 of the infield for the long term. Third base is still anybody's guess. I don't see Luis Valbuena or Josh Vitters being part of the winning formula, but the jury's still out on Vitters, who, at 23, is still young enough where he can make major strides offensively with more minor-league seasoning. Clearly he's not ready to face big-league pitching on an everyday basis. I'm not sure what to make of Ian Stewart, but his durability is a question even if he does return to the form that made him an everyday starter in Colorado, and if he does return to form, I see him as a midseason trade piece.

Personally, I'd continue to keep an eye on how Javier Baez and Christian Villanueva develop this year. I was particularly impressed with the burst of power Baez put up over the past few days, knocking four homers in two days. I like his quick wrists and he gets the bat through the zone in the blink of an eye. For a 20-year-old, his potential upside is huge. While he's still projected as a shortstop, Castro isn't going anywhere. Villanueva, who came over from Texas in the Ryan Dempster trade, has shown some pop this spring as well and is a natural third-baseman. If we're looking down the road for the Cubs to be competitive, the answers will be clearer by next spring. There's plenty of time to make that call.

The outfield is a big question mark. I don't see any of the outfielders going north with the team in April being part of the long-term formula.

Alfonso Soriano's monster contract ends after 2014, and while he clearly was the big gun of a somewhat toothless offense last year, I'm looking at him to help Theo and Jed raid somebody's top prospects in a deadline deal either this year or next. I've been impressed with how that's worked out so far.

The rest of the outfield is veterans on short-term deals; capable, but none who will turn the game on its ear in Nate Schierholtz, Scott Hairston and David DeJesus. The future lies in the minor leagues, with Brett Jackson, Jorge Soler and Albert Almora drawing most of the headlines. With only Jackson established as a professional, like the third base situation, we'll know more in a year's time.

Behind the plate, I like the addition of Dioner Navarro. For a veteran with a couple of playoff runs and a pennant under his belt, at 29 he's still a relative youngster. Welington Castillo was shown to be the favorite home-grown catcher last year, but I wouldn't count out Steve Clevenger. He got off to a torrid start in 2012 before hitting the DL with a strained oblique, and has had a promising spring this year. The most important aspect of catching is handling a pitching staff, however, and with a former all-star in Navarro in the mix, the best chance for either Castillo or Clevenger to continue developing might be at AAA rather than as a backup at the major league level.

That leaves the pitching staff, which was the primary focus of off-season transactions. Currently it looks like a rotation full of mid-rotation-caliber righties, depending on the health of Matt Garza and Scott Baker. Serviceable veterans with some postseason experience, but nothing earth-shattering. Last season showed there isn't a wealth of talent on the minor-league level there yet, with the possible exception of lefty Chris Rusin.

The bullpen is a different story. I like this Cub bullpen even without Sean Marshall, who was on the wrong end of perhaps the only misstep in Theo and Jed's first series of moves. Trade rumors continue to center around Carlos Marmol, though I wouldn't be disappointed if they amount to nothing. My only objection with Marmol is his role in the pen. He proved himself to be an elite setup man, and they should have kept him there. Adding Japanese star Kyuji Fujikawa was a big plus, and I'd like to see the forecast roles for him and Marmol switched, but I wouldn't count on it.

Beyond them, James Russell had an outstanding first half last year and much like Marshall is the kind of left-handed reliever every competitive team needs. Shawn Camp had a fine season in 2012 while leading the league in games pitched. I like new addition Carlos Villanueva as the swing man. Michael Bowden was an outright steal coming over in the Marlon Byrd trade. It's become a cliche that every team could use some help in the bullpen, but I'm not worried about the Cubs in that department. A far greater concern is getting them leads to hold down.

We're still learning about what we have here, but there's a solid foundation minus a few key pieces. Expect the Cubs to be active at deadline time again this year and more minor-league systems to be raided. Projection? With a rotation and an outfield full of actual major league veterans, I could see them making a run at .500 and finishing a few games short, depending on who's still around by August. Not great, and there's a shot at a last-place finish with Houston out of the picture and the Pirates threatening to end their record string of sub-.500 seasons for the past two years, but the Cubs' future looks brighter than it did a year ago, and things are only going to improve.

MIssing stats

While I appreciate some of the new methods of player evaluation brought about by Bill James and the Sabermetrics crowd, there's still a need for ones that focus on quantifying winning baseball and team play.

W+/- Wins Plus-Minus

Wins minus losses. Did the manager use that reliever to mop up in hopeless causes? Was the team that much better in their starting catcher's 135 games than in the 27 he missed? W+/- could tell you without having to slog through all the game logs.

While the new-math stathounds insist wins is an overrated statistic, at least for pitchers, I totally disagree. Whether in baseball or in life, some people inspire confidence and make everyone step up a notch just by being around. When Derrek Lee was injured in 2006, the Cubs lost more than a bat in the lineup and solid defense, they lost their anchor. A team that was 9-5 and half a game out of first through that game found themselves at 28-45 when he came back.

R+/- Runs Plus-Minus

Runs that a player’s team scores in excess of the opposition, while the player is in the game - a performance stat that removes the factor of high-scoring or low-scoring games. One of hockey's best stats, adapted to baseball.

RA - Runners Advanced

All bases advanced by runners, excluding the batter. This recognizes batters who hit with runners on base, make sure they’re the out on a fielder’s choice, make sacrifices, reach on errors and advance runners by two bases on a single or three on a double, which may not be all that valuable apart from runs and RBI in traditional statistics, but all of which are valuable aspects of team play. It also identifies pitchers who often get into trouble - two relievers with similar WHIPs and ERAs but different RAs would indicate which is more likely to be one minor slipup from a lead change in a tight ballgame.

BA - Bases Advanced

Similar to runners advanced. No matter how you get on or move up, it counts. Good stat for table setters. Whether you hit the ball or not, if you score, you get 4 BAs. If you advance to third and fail to score through no fault of your own, at least it counts for something. Bat your best BA hitters ahead of your best RA hitters. Tracking BA in addition to WHIP can help evaluate relief pitchers

RAA/BAA – Runners/Bases Advanced Average

Runners advanced divided by runners on base, and bases advanced divided by plate appearances. The averages remove factors such as mid-season callups or trades, injured players and bench players.

FC – Fielder’s Choice

Why put it on the scorecard if you’re not going to keep a tally? Batters with lots of FCs make contact with runners on base, and in a lucky year where the hops go their way, they could translate into runs. Pitchers with lots of FCs stay out of big innings and work their way out of jams, but in an unlucky year when the hops don't go their way, they could translate into runs.

Just a few ideas off the top of my head. I find WAR to be a deeply flawed pseudo-stat considering its increasing prominence - more on that later - but as a numbers geek I see no reason to keep looking for better ways to more thoroughly evaluate players' performances.