Win Dependent: Why Starting Pitcher's Win Totals Are Overrated

Yes, you play to win the game. But it's not always under the starter's control

Herm Edwards may hunt me down for saying this, but I think wins are overrated.

Actually, wins themselves are not overrated, but when they count into a pitcher's or a quarterback's personal record, I believe it becomes an overrated stat, especially in the short term.

For today, let's keep the focus on baseball.

For the casual baseball fan, a pitcher's win-loss record is how they judge a pitcher to be good or bad. If you're a smarter fan, you realize there are many factors that go into whether a pitcher gets a win or loss. Here are some of them:

1. Run Support - In order to get wins, before a pitcher can get one, he needs runs--usually about 4-5+ does the trick. However, if a pitcher is on a team whose offense is on one of the best offenses in the league (i.e. the Yankees), he will have a better chance of wins over the course of a season, even if the pitcher isn't considered an elite one.  Chien-Ming Wang comes to mind. During a two-year stretch recently with the Yankees, Wang went 38-13 despite having a slightly above average ERA during that time (about 3.66). This inflated record was largely due to the strength of the Yankees lineup, which is almost always one of the league's best.
   
   Meanwhile, a guy like Felix Hernandez struggles to win many games on a yearly basis despite being one of the best pitchers in the league. Out of his seven full seasons, he has only won more than 14 games once, despite regularly being one of the top 10 AL pitchers in ERA. At least Cy Young voters have given him credit, voting him as the award winner in 2010 despite a 13-12 record (he struck out 232 in a league high 249+ innings while also winning the ERA title at 2.27). If he were able to net close to similar numbers on a team like the Yankees, he would likely have a chance to win about 20 games a year.
2. Bullpen - The strength of a team's bullpen can also go a long way in determining games that count for,  against, and don't count altogether against a pitcher's record. A guy can throw an 8-inning gem in which he is winning 2-1 when he leaves, but he doesn't get a win because his reliever allows a run in the 9th. A team with a shitty bullpen can distort how effective a starter has been if we're looking strictly at wins and losses.
3. Strength of Opponent - With this, I'm not just referencing the lineup that the guy has to face, but also the pitching matchup. It is out of a pitcher's control as to how good or bad the opposing starter will be pitching-wise on a given day. One game, you may get a win despite allowing 6 runs because your opponent's starter allowed 8. Another, you may lose while only allowing 1 because you face a staff ace that shuts your team's offense down. While many would say that this stuff balances its stuff out, I don't believe that to be the case for everyone. Not all pitchers experience the same balance, as some may always have the benefit of a strong offense (where scoring 4-5+ is the norm) whereas a weaker offense may have problem scoring more than 3 runs consistently, putting considerable pressure on the starter to earn "his" win.
4. Strength of the Starter - It may seem a given that a pitcher's performance plays a role in whether he gets a win or not, but it does seem weird to say that his performance is probably towards the middle of importance in terms of whether he gets a victory. The examples provided above show that the pitcher's actual performance doesn't always dictate whether he will get the win.
   
   Obviously, the starter has to go 5+ innings to qualify for a win, but beyond that, it's up in the air as to whether you can look at a guy's pitching numbers and say whether he won the game or not.
   
   Below are two separate 4 game stretches by pitchers this year. One of these pitchers went 1-0 with 3 no-decisions, another went 0-1 with 3 no-decisions:
   
   

   	Innings	Hits	Runs	Earned	BBs	Ks
   	6	5	5	5	3	3
   	8	3	0	0	1	10
   	7	11	5	5	1	7
   	5	8	5	5	2	4
   Totals	26	27	15	15	7	24
   		WHIP: 1.31		ERA: 5.19
   	Innings	Hits	Runs	Earned	BBs	Ks
   	6	2	1	1	2	4
   	7	5	4	4	0	7
   	10	7	0	0	0	7
   	6	5	2	2	1	6
   Totals	29	19	7	7	3	24
   		WHIP: 0.76		ERA: 2.17

   
   Example 1 is R.A. Dickey's last four starts before today - he won the game he deserved to win, but didn't lose any of the 3 games he deserved to lose. This is because his offense bailed him out in those bad starts.
   
   Example 2 is Cliff Lee's first four starts of the year, a stretch of starts that includes a rare 10-inning performance in which he picked up a no-decision despite allowing no runs. You could argue that in this stretch, he should have been 2-1 at least.
   
   Granted, these are both small samples, but do indicate how much outside influence is required in getting wins and avoiding losses.

When you take everything I've mentioned above, you can see why looking at wins is probably not the best way to judge a pitcher. Yet, it seems that the media judge how good or bad a pitcher is based on the pitcher's record. After all, when you hear a pitcher's stats announced by a baseball analyst in a game cast, his win-loss record is always the first thing they mention.

I'd say that long-term, pitching wins are more of an indication of how good a pitcher is than on a short-term basis. There isn't a 300 win pitcher in baseball history who I'd say is an average or even a slightly above-average pitcher. Over the long haul, you have to pitch well to rack up a ton of wins. These guys will almost always have seasonal ERAs better than the league average with lower amounts of base-runners allowed.

If you happen to be on a team that provides you with a ton of runs, perhaps you can be like Wang and get close to 20 wins once or twice. But don't be that fool that falls for one-year wonder and suddenly things a guy is a good pitcher.

What makes a good pitcher is not wins. Look at the numbers and ratios that are under his control (for the most part), like strikeouts and walks per 9 innings, to judge how effective and good/great a guy is.

While we are on the subject of wins...I wish there was a way to edit how we credit winning pitchers. Say for example, a guy throws 8 shutout innings, but his bullpen allows the game to become tied in the ninth. However, in the bottom part of the inning, the team gets a walk-off win. In this scenario, whatever reliever was pitching last in the ninth gets the win, even if it's the guy that blew the initial lead by allowing one or more runs. All the while, the guy who allowed NO runs gets no win.

I say in cases like that, either give the starting pitcher the win, or don't credit any pitcher with the win. It makes no sense to reward a pitcher with a win if he's the reason they didn't initially win the game in the top of the ninth.

Anywho, I'm done. Looks like Herm Edwards hasn't found me yet

B List - Stupidest Sports Arguments (List 9)

I still plan on writing about the new NCAA playoff format and how it's going to cause more problems than it creates.

For now, I will mention it among six other sports arguments that I consider to be among the stupidest. This will likely have a slight Chicago lean, as I have listened to many an argument about sports from friends and strangers alike.

Here's the list of arguments that I consider to be among the most pointless.

7.  Tebow - There's no way to have a reasonable debate on Tim Tebow. He's such a polarizing sports figure that you may as well discuss your stance on abortion, gun rights and gay marriage and be more productive in talking. His critics (such as myself and anyone who likes their quarterbacks to be accurate and good) will never convince his fans (who love what he stands for and his ability to win close games) that he sucks, and his fans will never convince his critics that he is the greatest quarterback of all time. I'm convinced that ranking systems like NFL Networks Top 100 players (ranked him 95th best player in the league) and NFL Films (ranking him the 7th best Heisman winner in NFL history - a ranking that was to measure the career accomplishments of Heisman winners) were just to grab attention and ratings. Anyone who thinks Tebow has accomplished more in his short career (one in which he hasn't started a complete season) than Earl Campbell (8th) and Marcus Allen (9th) is smoking the kind of crack I'd like to smoke if I was into that sort of thing.

6. Comparing Michael Jordan to anyone - There are way too many times people want to compare the best players of the day to MJ. I discussed this in a blog almost two months ago with Kobe and how he and Lebron are often brought up by people who want to discuss today's players with the best of all time. No reasonable person would argue that these guys are better than MJ. Many times, this argument, at least from my observations, is usually addressed by the folks who are so hard for MJ that they can't wait to bring his name up anytime Kobe or LeBron does something good. "Kobe's good, but he's no MJ" or pictures of MJ flaunting his rings asking LeBron about his rings are just a few of the examples that pop up when people want to remind the world that MJ is the best. I don't think we need these comments/pictures posted on FB all the time to know that MJ is better than both of them. Let it go.

5. Old champs vs. new champs - Media and public folks do this a lot. How would (current champ) do against (some old great team), with most of the folks who are on the elderly side of the debate usually arguing for the latter. The most recent example of this was Kobe being asked if he thought this current collection of Olympians could beat the Dream Team in a game, with Kobe answering affirmatively. Did everyone expect Kobe to say, "No, you know what, I think we'd get killed." It's not in Kobe's DNA to admit that he can't do something, even if his heart of hearts believed that his current squad would have no chance. In one game, sure, this collection of guys may be able to win, but the Dream Team, whose player composition included all but one Hall of Famer, would likely win most matchups. But you know what? You can't possibly know what would happen because it can never happen. Therefore, these type of arguments are deemed pointless in my eyes.

4. Best running back ever - I've heard this many times argued among friends and on TV alike. There's only a few names that I would even consider being reasonable to discuss in the equation - including Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, OJ Simpson, Earl Campbell, and of course Walter Payton. Living in Chicago, the most common debate I heard was Payton being the best, with a few of my Dallas friends arguing Emmitt's case. It may not be the worst argument in sports, but with the way I've heard it argued, it usually turns into an ugly conversation. Perhaps that's more of a reflection of my friends arguing it than the argument itself. Since I am not old enough to have seen (or remember) many of these guys play, I can only go by statistics to say who was the best. And I don't think that's fair to the debate. I've always contended that Jim Brown was the best ever. Take a look at his stats and accomplishments if you get the chance to understand why I would think this. I'd rather not get into this argument, so I'm going to stop now.

3. BCS - For most of its existence, people have denounced the BCS as a crappy way to crown a college champion. The truth is - there is no perfect way to do this. Since there are many conferences and there's no way that teams can play completely balanced schedules, there will always have to be a human element involved with deciding who should be considered for the right to be champion (or at least play for the championship). The system that preceded the BCS was straight up voting, with many seasons in NCAA history ending without the two best regular season teams facing each other based on how the Bowl system would place teams into specific Bowls. Instead, the winner was voted on in polls before the BCS. At least with the BCS, you have almost always had two of the top 2-4 teams in the nation playing for the national championship. This new 4-team playoff is going to cause more problems than it will solve and will likely become one of its own top 2-3 dumb sports arguments out there. Whenever a selection process is used to decide who will make a playoff (as this playoff will be), you will hear about at least 2-3 teams a year (if not more) who got screwed out of a chance to play.

2. NCAA Tourney snubs - Speaking of NCAA and selection committees, one of the dumbest arguments I hear on a yearly basis is the teams who were left out of the NCAA March Madness tourney. Every year, a big part of ESPN and CBS broadcasts on Selection Sunday is devoted to the teams who barely squeaked in and the teams who just missed the tourney. Cases are made for each team who didn't make it (teams who are roughly 18-12 and lost in the second round of their conference tourney) as if they were leaving out the best team in the nation. It's gotten so bad with the tourney that they've even expanded the tourney several times in our lifetimes and people still complain about the last team who didn't make it. If you can't convince people that you are not one of the best teams in the nation when you have an 18-12 record and you don't win an automatic bid, you can't complain when you leave your team's postseason fate in the hands of a committee. The screams for the last team in are bad with the NCAA tourney - imagine how bad it will be when football gets around to their 4-team playoff.

1. All Star snubs - And the grand champion for stupid debates for me is All Star snubs. And this is by far the stupidest for me. While baseball is fresh in my mind, this also applies for the other sports who host an annual All-Star game. However, the bickering over baseball All Stars is probably the loudest (and definitely the most annoying). Even with expanding rosters, you could always find an idiot who says "My guy should have made it". Yeah, he could/should have, but who cares? In some ways, I'd rather have my guy rest for 3-4 days than go to a glorified exhibition game that most fans (at least the ones I know) don't care who wins. Even with the White Sox making a run towards the postseason, I have given little thought to the fact that they would be travelling for Game 1 of the World Series if they were lucky enough to make it that far because a collection of AL players lost 8-0 the other day. The new rule of adding a World Series stipulation to the game inspired the slogan "This Time, It Counts" from Fox for the longest time, inspiring even more annoying banter among people who say their guy should have made it and been able to help their league out in what should be a meaningless All-Star game. The emotion that is wasted when one gets sad or angry about their guy being left off a roster should instead be used to cheer that player on after the All-Star break ends. At the end of the day, the All Star game is an exhibition, whether the MLB's WS stipulation tells you or not.

A Look Back (and Look Ahead) at MLB thru All-Star Break

Many of you (based on blog views) read my MLB preview back in February in which I gave some of my predictions. Here it is again in case you want to take a look at it. Another blog I wrote featured a few more daring predictions: check that out here. I like to look back at my predictions, no matter how good or bad they are.

First, the Good predictions:

• Dunn will return to a 30+ HR hitter. He's only a few away from that mark. Granted, his average sucks, but he is seeing the ball better (much better OBP - which is what he is known for).
• One long-shot will win a division. Jury is still out on this, but according to the numbers I posted in March from what they were on 5dimes, the Pirates (30/1 to win NL Central), Mets (55/1 to win NL East), Orioles (110/1 to win AL East - yes, that high of odds - not a misprint), & the White Sox (12/1) are all in reasonable spots to contend in the second half of the season for their divisions. There's a chance none of these teams will win their division, but the fact remains - there's usually at least a few teams that come absolutely out of nowhere to make a surprising playoff run (or at the very least, threaten to make the playoffs).
• Nationals predicament w/ Strasburg. His inning limit is set in stone apparently. He has pitched 99 of his allotted 160-170 innings for the year, and yes, like I thought, the Nationals are in playoff contention. If this limit includes the playoffs, I think he's going to need to skip a few starts the rest of the year. 79 more team games would mean about 15-16 more starts if they stick with a 5 man rotation. 60-70 more innings in that time, wouldn't even be pitching more than 5 innings per game. Not sure of their minor league depth, but perhaps they could go to a 6-man rotation at a certain point. I would not want to have Strasburg sit if I'm a Nationals fan, but given the choice, I'd rather have him sit (or spread his starts out) now rather than later.
• Chris Sale as the best pitcher in the Sox rotation. I said that he would be the best by the end of the year, so I'm ahead of schedule. Peavy started off hotter than Sale, but the lefty has definitely left his mark as the future ace of the staff. I hope the Sox brass ensures that we don't overuse Sale now at the risk of a year-long injury in the near future (Wood, Strasburg, etc.). I know this sounds blasphemous, but Sale has the look of a younger Randy Johnson when he throws his wicked southpaw heat.
• AL HR leader: Jose Bautista (w/ Adam Dunn as listed sleeper); Al Cy Young: David Price; NL HR champ: Mike Stanton (Bruce as sleeper) - all have a fighters chance in those respective races. Except Mike is no longer Stanton's first name. Does that count against me?

Now, the Bad predictions

• Marlins winning a World Series - seems a little far fetched. I don't think they'll even finish about .500 at this point, yet alone win a World Series. Many of the stars on the team have underachieved. The defense behind the pitching has been awful. Chalk this one up as a loss for yours truly.
• Detroit Tigers running away w/ the AL Central. Many people had this one wrong as well. The Tigers could go on a great run to end the season and win by 10+ like they did last year, but I don't see it happening. I, like many others, underestimated what the White Sox are capable of. I think it will come down to the last series with the White Sox taking the AL Central crown again.
• MVP choices: Miguel Cabrera in AL & Hanley Ramirez in NL. Way way off.
• NL Cy Young: Roy Halladay. See above.

Glad to see I hit more than I missed on these. Here's my revised picks for divisions and World Series:

AL East: NYY (original pick: NYY)

AL Central: Chi (original pick: Det)

AL West: Tex (original pick: Tex)

AL Wild Cards: Detroit & LAA (original picks: Rays & LAA)

NL East: Washington (original: Mia)

NL Central: StL (original: StL)

NL West: SF (original: SF)

NL Wild Cards: LA & Cin (Original: Wash & Phil)

ALCS: Rangers over White Sox (Original: Yanks over Tigers)

NLCS: Wash over SF (Original: Mia over SF)

WS: Rangers (FINALLY!) over Wash (Original: Mia over NYY)

Feel free to offer your own predictions as you see them. I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Best Man Speech: The Jeffrey & Amber Bolek Edition

The speech, as I read it at the reception - 7-7-12. Feel free to steal anything here. Just credit me for it.

And thank you to everyone who came up to me and said my speech was a good one. Means a lot.

Good evening everyone. My name is Brian, or as some of you might know me as, Farty Pants. Thank you for joining in the celebration of Jeff and Amber’s marriage. I will try to make this as painless of a best man speech as possible. I’ll spare you the stories of the teasing that me and my cousins would do to him by calling him Personal Pan Peff when we were little or the story of Jeff spitting on me because he thought I spit on him when it was really a bird that pooped on his head.

This guy, who I have the privilege of calling my brother, has been the greatest brother a guy could ask for. We’re the only two in the family that can say they were born in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan (although I’m not sure that’s something to brag about).

My initial memories of my brother stem from his days in leg braces, back when he was around 4 or 5 years old.  That period of time was the only time he was ever slowed down, ever. And the braces didn’t even do a good job of that. When he got them off, he suddenly became the fastest guy I knew. He hasn’t sat still since he was born. If he wanted to pull a Forrest Gump and run back and forth between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, he could have (and still could). In addition to his speed, he’s always been one of the strongest guys I know (whisper…and don’t tell him this, but I think he could beat me up).

One thing I’ve always admired about my brother is his loyalty to his friends and family. I’ve heard countless stories about friends of his that seem to find themselves trouble, only for my brother to step up in a time of need and get that friend out of trouble. I can remember a time when I needed a ride from the 12:30am train and he was there in Oak Forest to pick me up…except I ended up falling asleep and waking up in Tinley Park and couldn’t contact him because my phone died. Funny enough, he knew of my tendency to fall asleep on trains, so he was driving around both Tinley stops looking for me at about 2am. I eventually found a pay phone and sure enough, he was already looking for me at both stops.

Getting back to his personal life, I’d say I was jealous of Jeff’s popularity. When I wasn’t toting this beer gut, I was a proud Mathlete with bifocals. Luckily, Jeff didn’t have such interests or vision problems. He always had girls interested in him from a very young age. Although I have to honestly say, none of them matched the overall beauty of his bride Amber.

Amber is the perfect girl for Jeff in every which way—with the way she loves him and takes care of him and ESPECIALLY with the way she gets along with him. I love him to death, but he is not the easiest guy to get along with—it has to take the patience and loving of a saint to deal with him 24/7. To that Amber, I wish you good luck—you’re gonna need it.

In all seriousness, you two are perfect for each other, and I know it’s going to last. Not because of anything I just mentioned above. No. Amber, you have done something today that Boleks have failed to do for the past two decades –you have got him to ditch shorts for a day to wear a pair of pants. So to make Jeff feel comfortable the rest of the night, I figured I’d lend him a pair. Sorry to tell you this Amber, but this is my wedding gift to you guys. (Hands shorts to Jeff). Yes, I did write that into my speech.

In closing, I’d like to say to you both—thank you for letting us be a part of your day. It is fitting that on today’s date 7/7, two people could be so lucky and come together as one. I can’t wait to see you two grow old together. A toast to the newlyweds.

B List - Dos and Don'ts of Best Man Speeches (List 8)

I am on the eve of giving a speech to the best brother a man can ask for. It's a speech that I take great pride in, a speech that I want to have an impression on the people attending the wedding.

Since I have made myself contractually obligated to create a B List every Friday, I decided to look at a website that features the do's and don'ts of best man speeches. Here are 7 of the do's and don'ts that stand out and how I rate myself according to each one.

7. Do have a drink to loosen up. Don't have 10 drinks to loosen up. This shouldn't be a problem. I'll probably have a couple beers at the house here before the wedding. I definitely don't want to be slurring my words during my speech. Later on in the night, say around 11:30pm, I make no guarantees.

6. Do flatter the bride. This won't be a problem either. Amber is a great girl, especially for my brother. I already have a chunk of my speech dedicated to her.

5. Don't wing it. This is something I couldn't do. I have things I would say without the benefit of a written speech, but I'm not good enough at just coming up with an entire speech on the fly. The speech is written, with a few things in it that I could add on the fly I'm sure. But by no means could I wing it completely.

4. Don't read it from a sheet of paper. I don't think I'm going to obey this one, unless I get around to writing some of it on note cards. I've already wrote it out on a word document. I'm probably just going to disobey this one and hope I don't rely completely on the piece of paper.

3. Do Keep It Short.  I don't know this guy's definition of short, but it won't take up an entire hour. I'm sure it'll take a few minutes though. And that's what she said. I won't give you the satisfaction of finishing that one...and that's what she said again.

2. Do Balance It Out. Again, I should have this covered by mentioning Amber in a chunk of my speech. I don't see how someone could give a speech that focuses solely on one person, even if you don't know either the bride or groom very well.

1. Don't Say Anything Dirty. I'm not sure if the word "Damn" is considered dirty. If it is, I may be saying something dirty. Perhaps I should browse the speech one more time to make sure I don't have anything too bad in it. I have to consider the half of the people that I don't know when giving this speech.

Nah, fuck it.

A Numbers Analysis into Baseball's First Half of the Year

Not sure how many of you rely on the family of sports sites with "reference" in the title (baseball-reference.com, pro-football-reference.com, etc.) for information. Myself, I love them all. I've been trying to use them more with my gambling exploits to find edges on matchups.

One stat that I'm going to look at for the second half of the baseball season is how important overall run differential is. Baseball-reference.com uses a Pythagorean formula for figuring out what a team's record "should" be based on a team's run differential throughout a season. For a more detailed formula on it, check it out here.


The idea of this formula was proposed by Bill James, who many sports nerds know as the mind behind Sabermetrics in baseball. It takes into account the perceived luck a team may be having (or not having). Some folks believe that winning by 1 or 2 runs is a thing that takes skill, but it's usually something that's supposed to even out over time. A team that wins consistently by larger margins is going to have a better chance of winning more games than a team that wins by a smaller amount for the margin of error involved.

I took a look at where each team who made/won a World Series since 1995 (the year wild cards were first used) ranked with this run differential stat to see what could be made of it, if anything. I also looked to see how far down each list you would have to go to find the worst team to make the playoffs:

Year	WS Winner (Pythagorean Rank)	WS Loser (PR)	Lowest Ranked Playoff	Top Team PR	Notable Teams PR records
2011	Stl (9th)	Tex (3rd)	9	Phil 103-59		30 teams
2010	SF (4th)	Tex (8th)	8	NYY 97-65		30 teams
2009	NYY (2nd)	Phil (5th)	11	LAD 99-63		30 teams
2008	Phil (3rd)	TB (5th)	12	Cubs 98-63		30 teams
2007	Bos (1st)	Col (4th)	16	Bos 101-61	Ariz 79-83 (div winner)	30 teams
2006	StL (16th)	Det (T 1st)	16	NYY/Det 95-67		30 teams
2005	ChW (5th)	Hou (7th)	9	StL 98-64		30 teams
2004	Bos (2nd)	StL (1st)	10	StL 100-62		30 teams
2003	Fla (11th)	NYY (2nd)	14	Sea 97-65		30 teams
2002	Ana (1st)	SF (4th)	12	Ana 101-61		30 teams
2001	Ariz (3rd)	NYY (5th)	9	Sea 109-53		30 teams
2000	NYY (13th)	NYM (8th)	13	SF (97-65)		30 teams
1999	NYY (3rd)	Atl (2nd)	9	Ariz (102-60)		30 teams
1998	NYY (1st)	SD (5th)	11	NYY (108-54)		30 teams
1997	Fla (7th)	Cle (9th)	12	Atl (103-59)	SF 80-82 (div winner)	28 teams
1996	NYY (8th)	Atl (2nd)	11	Cle (96-65)		28 teams
1995	Atl (2nd)	Cle (1st)	9	Cle (93-51)		28 teams

In the 17 World Series since the Wild Card format began, we can make note that the team who topped the run differential (Pythagorean formula) made the World Series in only 6 of 17 World Series, winning 3 of them). The 2nd ranked team has the exact same stats, winning 3 of the 6 World Series they have appeared in. A #1 vs #2 matchup has only happened twice, although in some cases it is not possible if the top 2 teams are from the same league.

Compare these numbers to the teams who barely sneak in or make it because they won a crappy division. Three teams with rankings in the double digits won the World Series, meaning that they made the most of making the playoffs. However, both teams that have entered the playoffs with a losing record (according to their PR) failed to make the World Series.

It should be noted that 24 of 34 teams who made the World Series in this time did finish in the Top 5 in PR record, so there is something to this - if you were a good team that won by a higher margin than other teams in a 162 game sample, then odds give you a better chance to succeed on average. In a 5 or 7 game series, crazy stuff can happen, so the occasional middle-of-the-road team who is lucky enough to make the playoffs will win it all (i.e. 2006 Cardinals, who finished 82-79 en route to having the worst winning percentage of any team to win a World Series).

2012

Using this year's statistics through July 4th, we can see where teams fit into this formula and what teams may be facing a regression and what teams could expect to have better records if their current numbers hold up for the second half of the season. I'll note the teams whose records would be 3+ games better or worse based on their perceived luck so far (according to the Pythagorean record) and have a legitimate shot at the playoffs. Colorado & Seattle should have 4 more wins than they actually do, but neither has a legitimate shot at the playoffs at this point.

Notable Teams That Should Improve (Records as of July 4)


Boston (Actual Record 42-40, 7 GB; PR 46-36) - Boston's offense cannot be ignored and would likely need to be the reason for Boston to make a run (none of their starters have ERAs below 4.00). If their pitching staff improves in the second half, it wouldn't be shocking to see them as one of the two Wild Cards.

St Louis (Actual 43-39, 2.5 GB; PR 47-35) - Like Boston, St Louis has been the victim of their pitching staff. The absence of Pujols hasn't hurt the Cardinals' offense at all, and I believe they can (and will) win the NL Central by year's end, although I'm in the camp that Lynn has probably peaked this year. Somehow, someway, I say they win the NL Central.

Philadelphia (Actual 37-46, 12 GB; PR 40-43) - Main reason that I even mention the Phillies is that their pitching always gives them a chance. The problem is that their staff isn't quite what it was last year, especially with Halladay on the shelf. Even though their record should only be 3 games better, it would be good enough for 8 games back in the division if this were the record to be used. It's unlikely they will overtake all 4 teams in the division to win it, but they could catch fire and be the second Wild Card

White Sox (Actual 44-37, first place; PR 47-34) - This shocked me, and in a good way. Their run differential indicates that the start of their season is legitimate and could actually be better. This may have been inflated from Tuesday's 19-2 romping of Texas, but nevertheless, the stats say the Sox are for real. Real enough to be considered a World Series contender. Their PR of 47-34 is tied for 2nd in the majors with the Yankees.

Notable Teams That Should Decline


Miami (Actual 39-42, 9 GB; PR 34-47) - Many think that Miami has underachieved so far this year (and you could make a case for that given their talent - I had them winning the World Series at the start of the year), but the numbers tell a different story. They are fortunate to be "only" 9 back and will likely tail further down if they continue with their current run differential.

San Fran (Actual 45-37, 0.5 GB; PR 42-40) - A team like San Fran is predicated on winning low scoring games, which obviously means they won't outscore their opponents by a high margin more often than not. If they can manage to continue doing so, then they could be one of those teams that enters the playoffs on the lower end of run differential and have a good chance to win short series simply on the strength of their rotation.

Baltimore (Actual 44-37, 5 GB; PR 38-43) - Right now, Baltimore would be the second Wild Card team. They have had the most luck, according to run differential, bettering what their actual record should be by 6 full games. If that corrects itself in the second half, then Baltimore will likely be facing a record along the lines of 82-83 wins - not bad for a team that's sucked so bad lately, but not good enough to make the playoffs.

Cleveland (Actual 42-39, 2 GB; PR 38-43) - I don't see Cleveland holding up in the second half of the year. I could see them fading to as low as fourth in the division.

Back To Busy-ness: The Halfway Point of Best Week of Summer

At the halfway point of the Busiest Week of 2012 (working title), and I'm still breathing...for now.

What happens at Whirlyball...

The week started with a great bachelor party that was even better than I thought it would be. I forgot how much fun my family and Jeff's friends (which are also my friends in an inherited sort of way) are to hang out with, especially with a few Summer Shandys in the blood stream. While I failed to succeed at both the Whirlyball and Casino portions of the day, I did succeed at enjoying my time with everyone who attended. Thanks again to those who came.

Sunday provided a little lull for me and Jen to enjoy some TV on our new couch. True Blood is in full bloom, which I am trying to get into. I'm not sure how much of the back story I need to know to get the plot. All I know is that the main character Sooki seems to cause as many problems as the broad with a similar name in another TV show that I will not acknowledge supposedly causes on a shore. I digress.

The before picture of Ribfest. Sadly, not much different than the after

Monday was my first Rib Fest experience. I wore the white t-shirt that I promised in my blog from last week's B-List. Unfortunately (in terms of Facebook and the general public), the shirt did not get messy. A large part of this had to do with my ordering of sandwiches (a double boneless riblet sandwich and a BBQ chicken sandwich) as opposed to ribs. The other part, which I didn't give much thought to until the day came, was the incredible heat that we faced. It made staying at a Rib Fest and eating more food, including messy ribs, too much of a chore. So we left, with nary a stain on the shirt to speak of, although Jen's brother did pour water on my nipples. So there's that.

On Tuesday, we traveled to the La Salle/Peru/Princeton area of the state, occupied by Jen's wonderful family, along with a bunch of billy's of hill decent. I had a great time swimming at Jen's aunt and uncle's, along with watching fireworks for the first time with Jen right along the Illinois River as I had to drink to not only blend in but also provide my body with the necessary liquids to replace the sweat. I don't want to hear from any smart people with common sense that drinking beer can't do that, so yeah. Great night with a great gal and her great family.

A family of which I got to meet another member about 14 hours ago. Jen's dad lives in Cherry, IL, a small IL town that has about 500 people and is best known for a coal mining disaster that claimed the lives of 250+ people in 1908. Driving through a small town like that makes me think that it's about how it must seem to drive through my old hometown of Crystal Falls in Michigan. In our limited time at his place, I engaged in some chat about baseball and sports in general. It was nice meeting him finally.

After this, the halfway point of the busy week ended with hanging out with my family - definitely a theme of both halves of the week. Family stuff was fun as always. I love them all. Jen and I left there before they left for fireworks though, only because I was worn out from everything that I mentioned above.

Also, I am going to a Sox game tomorrow in 900 degree heat, with about the best seats I've had in a while. I needed to save some of my remaining energy for that. The next four days, with the wedding of the summer as the highlight, prove to be just as eventful.

In the meantime, if anyone can think of a great nickname for the week that encompasses as much of our week as possible, I'd appreciate it. Some ones I have thought of:

Business in Front, Party in the Back (of the Week)

RIBbed for Our Pleasure: The Greatest Week of Summer 2012

Ok...on that note, I'm done. Good night everyone.