Skip to content

Jimmy Rollins predicts at least 100 wins for the Phillies

Feb 19, 2011, 4:39 PM EDT

crystal ball

You guys aren’t going to believe this, but Jimmy Rollins told Matt Gelb of the Philadelphia Inquirer that he expects the Phillies to be good this season.

“We’ll win 100 games,” Rollins said Saturday. “I really plan on going after, what is it, Seatlle won 114 [sic] or something. … We’ll go get somewhere hopefully in that range. But that requires everybody doing their job.”

C’mon, Jimmy. That’s all you got?

Injuries could change everything, especially if more than one of their “big four” goes down for a significant period of time, but I would be downright surprised if the Phillies didn’t finish the regular season with 100 wins. Anything short of a fifth straight division title would and should be a disappointment.

Granted, the 2001 Mariners – who actually won 116 games – were built differently than these Phillies, but they remain an important example that historic dominance during the regular season doesn’t promise anything in October.

  1. seeingwhatsticks - Feb 19, 2011 at 5:00 PM

    Glad to see the expectations haven’t gone to their heads.

    Question: if the team wins 100+ games, how many of those will Jimmy Rollins actually be healthy enough to play in?

  2. PanchoHerreraFanClub - Feb 19, 2011 at 5:35 PM

    It kinds reminds me about the Big 3 of Heat talking about breaking the NBA record for wins. We all know how well that worked out. Although with18 games each against the Mutts, Feesh, and Nats anything is possible.

    • Old Gator - Feb 19, 2011 at 10:00 PM

      The Heat can make some trades this offseason that will put them in line for that record. You can build around a “Big Three” like that the way you couldn’t much build around any other core. Boston is a model of a brilliantly balanced team; right now the Heat are more like a brilliantly unbalanced team. But it’s only year one and you can see those guys getting used to working together as the season moves along.

      Now back to the NL East: as much as I predicted doom and gloom for the Feesh last season (and was right in most particulars, especially about the boolpen), this year’s team is going to be better all around. Now that Scrooge McLoria has danced to the shots the union was ready to fire into the floor around his Guccis, I can’t be unreasonable and go on ticket strike again this year. It’s not exactly like I won’t have Scrooge and the Chihuahua to kick around anymore, but fair is fair.

      Big question is whether the Iron Giant will continue to mature as a hitter or go on taking golf swings at balls in the dirt, how well Coughlan rebounds and whether Morrison grows a bit or sophomore slumps. The weak link is going to be Kindly Uncle Wes Helms at third; the gaps in the right side of the infield that Infante will fill are just gonna shift over to the left side now.

      Overall the rotation and the boolpen will both be better, especially the setup guys, but frankly, I’m still just not sold on Nunez as the stopper. We shall see. But by and large the pen should give away fewer games this season.

      • PanchoHerreraFanClub - Feb 20, 2011 at 8:48 AM

        I actually think that the NL East will be better all around. Since you did a great job addressing the Feesh I won’t mention them. The Mutts at last have some professional management in the FO and that should count for something. The Nats keep acting like want to have a winning season as sign vets to fill the many holes. Finally, the Braves may be the surprise team, as you never know how they will react to a new manager after being skippered by Cox for so long. The Braves could be much better or much worst (how is that for covering all the bases).

  3. henryd3rd - Feb 19, 2011 at 6:09 PM

    I love Rollins; but someone need to have him pee in the cup. They have a great starting five; but who is their closer? Brad Who? Yeah right? Rivera he ain’t. Can he spell injuries? They will win a lot of games; but don’t bet the ranch on that bullpen in the playoffs

  4. Chris Fiorentino - Feb 19, 2011 at 6:40 PM

    Well, boys, I missed where Jimmy even MENTIONED OCTOBER in the article. He was talking about the regular season. If last year proved anything, even to Jimmy, it is that anything can happen in October. He was SPECIFICALLY talking about the regular season.

  5. smokehouse56 - Feb 19, 2011 at 9:25 PM

    Jimmy Rollins is a great shortstop. He is a legend in Philly. But stop talking so damn much. Do I think the Phillies will win 100+ games this year. Yes, but don’t tell anyone.

    • seeingwhatsticks - Feb 19, 2011 at 9:32 PM

      Corection: Jimmy Rollins WAS a great shortstop. Call me crazy but I prefer my “great” players to hit higher than .250.

  6. Ari Collins - Feb 19, 2011 at 9:44 PM

    They’ll have to have some luck go their way to win 100 games. Usually about one team makes it every year, but you can never tell which 95-win team will get a little lucky this year.

    They’ll definitely need Rollins to beat his recent .700 OPSes this year, that’s for sure.

  7. dirtyharry1971 - Feb 19, 2011 at 9:54 PM

    Why would anyone write down predictions from this moron? He also predicted the phils would beat the Yanks in the “09 WS, we all saw how that worked out, what a moron and not only that he sucks as a player too!

    • smokehouse56 - Feb 19, 2011 at 11:34 PM

      Speaking of morons.

    • cur68 - Feb 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM

      Rollins put out some not unreasonable expectations. They were 97 wins last year, arguably Lee gives them 10+ more wins. No brainer if you respect baseball stats, that they aught to win more than 3 more games this year as they have increased win totals every year since 2006. Rollins might wind up being wrong, but how could you know? Based on what do you say this? Certainly not the numbers. In order to predict that Rollins is wrong the predictor would then have to have solid fore knowledge of injuries, accidents, bad luck and acts of god that would make this so because the numbers say otherwise. Or they’re just a moron.

  8. Chris Fiorentino - Feb 19, 2011 at 11:08 PM

    The Phillies struggled scoring runs for a large part of last year, yet they ended up with 97 wins and the best record in baseball…and this was with only 2 months of Roy Oswalt and no Cliff Lee. If the rotation stays healthy, they could win 3 more games with their eyes closed.

    • vader000 - Feb 19, 2011 at 11:42 PM

      Exactly, this team is definitely capable of reaching 100 wins and if things go their way they could get more then that. Thats also pretty much what he said “But that requires everybody doing their job.” I find it really funny how nowadays the Phillies are the team that bring out the haters. Mostly bitter Yankee fans who are still in shock over Cliff Lee. Can’t wait to sit back enjoy watching this year play out.

  9. Ari Collins - Feb 20, 2011 at 12:32 AM

    I’ll take the under on 100 wins on any team if anyone wants to put their money where their keyboard is.

  10. xmatt0926x - Feb 20, 2011 at 1:18 AM

    I think everyone is making way too much of a deal about what Rollins said. To “seeingwhatsticks”, try to relax my man. Your comments always stand out. Your a Giants fan and a very bitter one at that. Its all in good fun. Try not to make sports your sole purpose in life. You’ll live longer. Just because someone says anything positive about another team or player not on the giants, it doesn’t mean you need to take it personally. Relax.

    • seeingwhatsticks - Feb 20, 2011 at 1:39 AM

      So what? I’m not allowed to have some fun with a guy whose mouth runs more than his legs can at this point? I comment on a lot of things that aren’t related to the Giants or Phillies, and excuse me for thinking losing Werth might hurt more than getting Lee will help.

      • bowens3181 - Feb 20, 2011 at 12:46 PM

        I’m not a phillies fan or anything, but that just plain stupid. You sound like a guy who is desperately trying to convince himself that the Phillies got worse over the off-season even though everyone knows that they got much better…

      • seeingwhatsticks - Feb 20, 2011 at 3:21 PM

        Lee’s a great pitcher but their problem wasn’t starting pitching, it was inconsistent offense and a shallow bullpen and they didn’t do anything to address either issue this offseason. All of the Phillies best offensive players have been injury prone and there’s no reason to think they will get healthier as they continue to get older. Adding great players can make you a better team but only if those great players address weaknesses and Cliff Lee doesn’t address any of the Phillies biggest weaknesses. They are still entirely left handed offensively. They still only have 1.5 reliable arms in their bullpen. They still play like a more traditional AL team, waiting for the 3 run homer and the big inning. That 3 run homer strategy doesn’t work when the opponent can pitch and either keep runners off the bases or keep balls in the yard. Werth was their only threatening right handed bat as well as their healthiest player the last couple of years so it stands to reason that losing him is going to hurt. I don’t know that I would have matched the contract he got from the Nats but I know that my priority would have been finding a replacement rather than committing huge money and term to a starting pitcher that’s older than Werth is when starting pitching wasn’t my biggest problem. Just off the top of my head the for the money they spent on Lee they could have signed Beltre and Jorge De La Rosa, which would have added a right handed bat to replace Werth, moved Polanco back into a super utility role, added some quality depth to the rotation, and they’d be on the hook for less money and less years than with Lee. Whatever was left on the table could have been used to upgrade the bullpen too. In my opinion (and you’re free to disagree), spending the Lee money in 2-3 places instead of just 1 would have made the Phillies much better than they are right now.

        Winning in MLB is like weight loss; the first 20-25lbs are pretty easy, it’s the last 5-10lbs that are really hard. In baseball it’s much easier to get to 90-95 wins than it is to go from 95-100+ wins, especially when the only team in the NL that got significantly worse in the offseason is the Padres. As has been stated above, the Marlins and Braves both should be better, the Nationals (while still not very good), should be better. The Reds and Cardinals aren’t going away and the Brewers should be much improved. The Giants and Rockies should be at least as good as they were last year, and the Dodgers should be a little better too. Hell there’s even some buzz that the Pirates might be better this year. The point is, it’s a lot easier to talk about 100 wins in theory than it is to actually find them on the schedule.

      • Chris Fiorentino - Feb 20, 2011 at 9:52 PM

        Beltre is a dog. You know he is going to be a dog now that he got his money. He had the prototypical contract season last year, and he will never live up to his contract. De La Rosa? Seriously? Dude, your team won the World Series, so you should be happy with that and leave the off-season grading to people who know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to the Philadelphia Phillies. Getting Cliff Lee changes the entire complexion of the team for the better.

        I know it is just a t-shirt, but that doesn’t necessarily make it wrong:
        WIN COLUMN&
        WIN COLUMN&
        WIN COLUMN&
        WIN COLUMN&
        YOU HAVE A CHANCE

        Come playoffs, it’s a whole new ballgame, but for the regular season, I’d be SHOCKED if the Phillies don’t win the NL East by double-digit games. With this pitching, how does this team NOT win 100 games?

      • seeingwhatsticks - Feb 20, 2011 at 10:02 PM

        I actually totally agree about Beltre, and I would never want him on my team. I think you’re underrating De La Rosa though. He has some nasty stuff and had a pretty decent year last year, his big problem is consistency not ability. Those were just two names off the top of my head and not the result of any extensive research I was just trying to make the point that the Phillies may look back on this offseason and regret spending all that money on Cliff Lee and not spreading it around to address the reasons they didn’t win it all last year.

      • Jonny 5 - Feb 21, 2011 at 9:13 AM

        seeingwhatsticks, Guess what? Some more people who don’t know what they’re talking about when it comes to baseball opened their mouths about the Phillies… Big Stupid heads that they are…

        “A San Francisco Chronicle reporter asked Giants manager Bruce Bochy to handicap the season – it’s apparently never too early for that – and he complied by pushing his way onto an already dangerously overcrowded bandwagon.

        “Because of track record, I think you would have to look at [Philadelphia's] staff as the best in baseball,” said Bochy, who also manages a pretty good staff. “I think everybody in the National League would tell you the road to the World Series has to go through Philadelphia, with the quality of their staff.”

        All these uneducated dummies talking about Philly like that… I heard some even dummer dummy Pat Gillick was saying they were a 100 win team too. He doesn’t know Jack, right???

  11. crankyfrankie - Feb 20, 2011 at 1:32 AM

    You are so right Harry for Rollins to have the audacity to say before the World Series that his team would win. What a goof ball he is he should have said ” Oh no we are going to get our butts kicked even though we are the defending champions.” What is the phrase I am seeing more and more here, and enjoying too, chipwich. Well if thew ice cream and cookie delight fit ?…

  12. Jonny 5 - Feb 20, 2011 at 8:09 AM

    Last season the offense let down the starters over and over again with their “issues” a whole bunch of quirky injuries. Look at the first part of last season if you need reminding of what the offense is capable of. 100 wins is a realistic goal, I wouldn’t be shocked to see that Seattle record in jeopardy either. They just have the issue now of complacency behind this rotation to deal with now. Don’t lose the fire boys. 97 wins last season with a fraction of this rotation they have today.

  13. uyf1950 - Feb 20, 2011 at 10:28 AM

    What no prediction on the Phillies winning the World Series after their 100+ win 2011 season. I guess he remembers how his last prediction on the Phillies winning the world series worked out. Of the 3 ML teams with the most wins during the season the Cubs in 1906 won 116 games, the Mariners in 2001 won 114 games and the Yankees in 1998 won 114 games. Only the Yankees went on to win the World Series. Although the Cubs did win the World series in 1907 after winning 107 games that year.

  14. Panda Claus - Feb 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

    Of all the NL East teams, the Phillies certainly have far better odds of topping 100 wins this season. That alone doesn’t buy much. There’s no need to ping on Rollins for expecting a lot of wins this year, with the players this team has they should win 100.

    • cur68 - Feb 20, 2011 at 11:21 PM

      Ayup.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Jackie Robinson Day is bittersweet
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. T. Wood (6650)
  2. J. Kubel (5905)
  3. I. Nova (5027)
  4. S. Kazmir (4718)
  5. K. Uehara (4040)
  1. M. Moore (3899)
  2. Z. Britton (3566)
  3. J. Johnson (3535)
  4. T. Walker (3506)
  5. J. Chavez (3210)