Roundtable: Where does each NL West team stand?

While divisions aren't won until games are played, it's not a stretch to assume that the addition of Freddie Freeman to the Dodgers' lineup gives them a leg up in what could be one of the toughest divisions in baseball.

A group of NL West MLB.com beat writers gathered to debate how the NL West looks, a few weeks ahead of Opening Day.

Alyson Footer, moderator/editor: The National League West division is never lacking intriguing storylines, as we saw last year when we all thought the Dodgers-Padres showdown would be one of the most interesting things to watch all season. This year, the intrigue seems to have increased tenfold, with most of the division making moves to improve or remain competitive.

Let’s start with the most obvious difference-maker -- the Dodgers signed Freddie Freeman, which made arguably the best lineup in baseball even better. Are the Dodgers a slam-dunk guarantee to win the division?

Juan Toribio, Dodgers beat reporter: Clayton Kershaw said that just because they have “nine of the best players in the game” doesn’t mean that they’re going to win. As we know in baseball, that statement is probably true. You don’t win games on paper. But there’s also no way that this lineup doesn’t become one of the best in recent memory. They have power, patience, speed and don’t swing at balls out of the strike zone. If they don’t win the division by a decent margin, it’ll be one of the most shocking developments in a long time.

Maria Guardado, Giants beat reporter: I don’t think the Dodgers are guaranteed to win the division, but they’ll definitely be the heavy favorites. That said, they were also the heavy favorites last year, and the Giants ended up stunning everyone by winning 107 games, so you can’t really rule out the unexpected.

Steve Gilbert, D-backs beat reporter: Like they needed something else to make them the favorites?!?! It certainly seems like they have the best lineup and offensive depth in the division.

AJ Cassavell, Padres beat reporter: Yeah, the nature of baseball is such that there really aren’t any slam-dunk guarantees. (The 2021 Giants proved that, didn’t they?) But the Dodgers are prohibitive favorites right now, and deservedly so.

Thomas Harding, Rockies beat reporter: Of course the Dodgers are the favorite. They were even before the signing. They are after. I would not be shocked if they’re the favorites until the end of time. Of course, that’s not really the question, since they’re also favorites to win the World Series. Question is, will they? Since winning it in 1965, they have arguably been a favorite at least as often as not and they’ve won three, with 1988 being the only time they did so in a 162-game schedule. All that said, Freddie Freeman was by far the best option to fill a long-time need: production and stability at first base.

Footer: Freeman’s left-handed bat sliding in somewhere near the top of that order seems like a perfect fit, easing the pain of losing an impact player like Corey Seager. Is there anything in particular about Freeman that stands out to you in terms of what will make the biggest difference on this team?

Toribio: Most people are saying that adding Freeman was a luxury for the Dodgers. And while that’s partly true, the reality is that getting him was probably more of a necessity than it was luxury. Max Muncy, last year’s starting first baseman, is coming back from a torn UCL that he suffered in October. His status for Opening Day is a little up in the air. Then you throw in the fact that Seager is now in Texas and the Dodgers really needed a strong left-handed bat in the top of the order. Seager was more of a free swinger, often swinging at the first pitch. Freeman, on the other hand, will wear down opposing pitchers. He’s the perfect fit to sandwich between Mookie Betts and Trea Turner.

Gilbert: He’s a great fit in that clubhouse as well. Another veteran leader with championship experience. Seems like a good pairing with guys like Justin Turner, Max Muncy, Clayton Kershaw, etc.

Cassavell: The Dodgers just have this knack for wearing you down because they simply don’t have any weak spots in their batting order. Now, they’ve taken one of the more questionable spots in their lineup and turned it into one of the best hitters in the sport. It’s great for the Dodgers. And it’s hugely taxing on opposing pitching staffs.

Footer: I’d like to bring the Rockies into the conversation here, mainly because while it’s notable that they signed a very good player -- former NL MVP Kris Bryant -- to a lucrative contract, it’s still a little curious, given how much of an uphill climb it’ll be for them to rise to the level of some of the intradivision rivals. Were you surprised by the Bryant signing?

Toribio: The Rockies caught some jokes and backlash on Twitter (shocker), but I thought this was a really solid move by them. Bryant is a good player and is versatile. I was pretty impressed with their starters last season. They needed some bats and they got one with Bryant.

Guardado: The odds of Bryant re-signing with the Giants always felt low, but I was surprised to see him remain in the NL West with the Rockies, simply because a lot of their homegrown players -- namely Nolan Arenado and Trevor Story -- have seemed to grow discontented with the direction of the franchise. He’ll definitely give the Rockies another big piece to build around, so I could see them causing headaches for the other contenders within the division this year, especially since they tend to play so well at home.

Gilbert: Very surprised, especially given that they paid a chunk of Nolan Arenado’s money to send him to the Cardinals a year ago. Good for them for going after a player like that. It will be interesting to see how he impacts their offense and how Bryant holds up playing a full season at mile-high altitude.

Cassavell: I certainly would’ve been less surprised if the Padres had signed him, considering he’s exactly the type of player the Padres are looking for.

Harding: Yet another fascinating twist to the story of baseball’s strangest team. Yes, sometimes it’s of its own doing, but you throw a home-park atmosphere that no one truly understands or takes the time to understand, and the Rockies are a lot of fun to figure out.

I was thinking of an analogy of a sub-.500 team signing a star player in his prime years, and being transformed by said player. The Marlins signed Ivan “Pudge” Rodriguez in January 2003, improved by 12 games and won the World Series. In a more normal scenario, a struggling Tigers team signed the exact same player in 2004, and it took until ‘06 for that team to appear in the Fall Classic.

Why Bryant? While there have been missteps and departures, starting with DJ LeMahieu not being retained after 2018, the Rockies still have the best starting pitching staff they’re ever had. It fueled postseason trips in ‘17 and ‘18, and the last three years that pitching has been wasted.

Footer: Do you feel like the moves the Rockies made – Bryant, José Iglesias, Chad Kuhl, Alex Colomé – are enough to, at the very least, narrow the gap between them and the Dodgers and Giants? That seems to be where some of the criticism lies – why make a splashy signing now, when, on paper at least, they’re not on the cusp of contending?

Guardado: I don’t know if it’s enough to close the gap, but I applaud them for being willing to go after quality players and try to build a competitive roster even while playing in one of the toughest divisions in baseball. More teams should do that.

Gilbert: I don’t know if they narrowed the gap, but those moves should certainly improve their team and with the extra Wild Card in play this year, who knows.

Harding: Unless the Rockies hit upon a generation of position players and pitchers at the same time -- think 2007-09 -- they will never close a talent-for-talent gap. The question is, can the parts be manipulated on a game-by-game basis, and can they approach .500 on the road, and is that enough to beat teams with greater talent? That’s why the Kuhl (rotation depth), Iglesias (infield defense) and Colomé signings have to work with the Bryant signing -- and improvement from multiple returning players.

Footer: Let’s move on to the Giants. Most of what is being written now is along the lines of, “We don’t know how they won 107 games last year, and we don’t know how they will come anywhere close to that this year.” I think they beat the PECOTA projections by what, 35 wins? At this point, we know not to second-guess what may have looked like an “aging” team last year.

So how should we look at them this year? Is the division race destined to be another Dodgers-Giants showdown?

Guardado: The Giants will enter the season with higher expectations, but it’s unrealistic to expect them to win 107 games again this year. They did a nice job rebuilding their starting rotation and trying to soften the departure of Kevin Gausman, but they still lost Buster Posey and Kris Bryant, their top two hitters in the playoffs last year. They have an unproven rookie behind the plate in Joey Bart, and a lot of their core veterans, including Brandon Belt, Brandon Crawford and Evan Longoria, will be a year older. There are a lot of question marks, so they’re going to have to prove a lot of people wrong again if they plan on defending their NL West title.

Harding: The folks who do PECOTA projections are way smarter than the rest of us. But how often do they warn us of a surprise? Then again, if it’s a surprise, then how do they know? Answered my own questions.

The Giants have lost some talent, but in being around manager Gabe Kapler and that club, I sensed that there is a high-level of buy-in for different preparation methods and strategies. They’re not likely to win 107, but I would be shocked if they weren’t a prime postseason contender.

Footer: The only thing that might be as hard as prognosticating the Giants’ chances is attempting to unravel some of the uncertainty around what exactly the Padres have entering ’22. Actually, let me preface that by saying we know one thing for sure -- Fernando Tatis Jr. will miss the early part of the season while healing from a wrist injury. Will his absence in the early stages of the season be too much for the Padres to overcome?

Cassavell: In the division race -- if the Dodgers play the way we think they can play -- it might be. But the Padres are resolved to withstand Tatis’ absence. They’re getting Mike Clevinger back. They’re still looking to add a big bat to their outfield. Bob Melvin is at the helm. It’s significantly tougher to win the division without Tatis. But let’s not forget there’s an extra playoff spot available this season, and Tatis will be back long before then.

Toribio: I know San Diego will be without Fernando Tatis Jr. for a while, but I’m buying into the possibility of the Padres being the team that we all expected them to be last season. Bob Melvin is a great fit for them. You also gotta think they’ll probably stay a little bit healthier on the pitching side this season. So to answer the question, I don’t think it’ll come down to just Los Angeles and San Francisco. I think San Diego will be in the mix.

Gilbert: Tatis is obviously a huge loss for them but they’re a really talented team and if their pitching holds up, they can probably weather Tatis being out for a bit.

Harding: The Padres may be baseball’s second-most fascinating team. Since the early days of free agency, they make periodic huge splashes and rarely qualify for the postseason. Their pitching has to be much better to withstand the Tatis loss. One thing we do know is if they struggle, they’ll be aggressive in making moves.

Footer: Is this division race more likely to be between the Dodgers, Giants and Padres, or just the Dodgers and Giants?

Toribio: I’m all in on a three-team race. That sounds like a lot of fun.

Guardado: I agree with Juan.

Gilbert: I could see this being a three-team race, but I’m not as sold on the Giants repeating what they did last year.

Cassavell: The Padres needed to add to their offense before Tatis’ injury. They need to do so even more right now. As things stand, I’d say the Padres are on the outside looking in. But I’m also fairly certain they aren’t finished adding to their roster.

Harding: The Dodgers and Giants, definitely. I expect one of the other clubs to make the postseason.

Footer: Let’s touch on the D-backs for a moment. Their challenge is the biggest of all: build back from within, in one of the toughest divisions in baseball. There’s an argument that the NL West is the second-strongest in the game, behind only the AL East. What areas should we look for progress in this year?

Gilbert: GM Mike Hazen hates to use the “rebuilding” word, but let’s be honest here, that’s what they are doing and rightly so. They have a real exciting group of prospects that will start hitting the big leagues at some point this year and they need to embrace that as opposed to trying to sign some stopgap veterans that will take at-bats away from the kids. As far as specific areas of improvement – they invested in veterans Mark Melancon and Ian Kennedy to fix what was a woeful pen last year. They also need to improve their defense, which took a huge step back last year. One of the reasons was they moved players around the diamond so much. They are going to make an effort to do less of that this year, which should help.

Harding: As my esteemed colleague, Mr. Gilbert, says, there are many areas to improve, and rebuilding sounds like a good idea. But when a team brings in Melancon and Kennedy, it’s the equivalent of a puncher taking a swing. Settle the lineup, surprise some folks, then do good things at the deadline. Or struggle, sell off assets and rebuild from there.