A Francisco Treat: Why White Sox Fans Should be Somewhat Optimistic about Our Newest Hurler

Can he revive his career, even briefly, as others below did?

Leery? Ah, no....well, maybe.

While enjoying some beverages on the roof last night, I was told that Francisco Liriano was traded to the White Sox. The person who brought me the news was stoked that we picked up the left-hander from the Twins. I was hoping that I misheard him and we traded for the 2006 version of Liriano, who went 12-3 w/ 144 strikeouts and 32 walks in just 121 innings while posting a 2.13 ERA. Since then, he has been up and down and for the most part, quite average. The past year and a half has been brutal for Liriano: 5.18 ERA, 130 walks allowed in 234+ innings, 12-20 record. You can easily see why I might be skeptical of this trade.

Granted, I happened to attend a game last year in which Liriano threw a no-hitter, as I noted in my blog here: click here fools. However, even that wasn't a pretty affair for the southpaw, as shown by his 6 walks and only 2 strikeouts. In fact, before this no-no, there was question as to whether Liriano was going to stay in the rotation.

However, after a night's sleep, I started to see the silver lining in the trade, but it has little to do with Liriano himself. What suddenly turned me from a skeptic into a big fan of the trade? Why, it would be the pitching coach - Don Cooper.

Don Cooper has a gift in briefly reviving the careers of mediocre and under-performing pitchers - I emphasize briefly because the guys below have shown to have one season of moderate-to-All-Star level brilliance, only to regress a year or two later. Here's a few guys who have joined the White Sox as underachievers and turned their careers around (at least for a season):

(Note: I'm not mentioning some guys who had extended runs of success before the White Sox - i.e. David Wells. One guy on this list may not qualify based on this criteria, but f it, it's my blog and I'll be hypocritical if I want to.)

Poster boy of what pitching under Cooper can do for a pitcher

Esteban Loaiza - Before joining the White Sox in 2003, this journeyman pitcher had stints with three different teams. He had never posted an ERA below 4.13 and reached double digit wins just three times in his first 8 seasons, with a career high of 11. For one magical season with the White Sox, Loaiza went 21-9, notching a league-high 207 strike outs and a 3.7 K/BB ratio, all good enough to finish runner-up in the Cy Young vote.

However, his good fortune turned out to be a one-hit wonder. After posting a 4.86 ERA in 21 starts for the Sox in 2004, he was swapped at the trading deadline to the Yankees for the White Sox next reclamation project - Jose Contreras. Including the Yankees, he played on four teams in his last five seasons before rejoining the Sox for a brief stint in 2008. He was never able to come close to that Cy Young-worthy season. His career with the Sox (30-14, 3.65 ERA) versus his stints with seven other teams (96-100, 4.86 ERA) shows that we definitely got the best of him, and Don Cooper should be credited for that.

Sox fans were all smiles when Contreras had his great run in 2005-06

Jose Contreras - Much like Loaiza, the rebuilding of Contreras into an All-Star pitcher was short-lived, but  he pitched at his best when the White Sox needed him most. His best stretch came with the Sox in 2005 & 2006, where he went 28-16 combined with a 3.93 ERA. Between the end of 2005 and start of 2006, Contreras won 17 straight decisions. His performance down the stretch in 2005 helped the Pale Hose stave off the Cleveland Indians, who nearly stole the division from the White Sox after being over a dozen games back with two months to go.

His career eventually leveled out after this brief run of success. In his last six seasons, Contreras has split time with the White Sox, Rockies and Phillies, finding a new role as a reliever in the past three years in Philadelphia. His 30-40 record, 4.88 ERA and horrendous 1.44 WHIP during that time is a complete 180 from those two years. Again, I'd have to credit Cooper for this brief run of success.

Javier Vazquez - His tenure with Chicago was a turbulent one, but Vazquez did pitch one of his best seasons as a member of the White Sox, notching 213 strikeouts in 216+ innings, with nice ratios in K/BB (4.26) and WHIP (1.14) in 2007, his second season with the team. His 15 wins were by far the most on the team, who had one of their worst seasons in the past decade, limping to a 72-90 record. I believe we may have regarded this season as a better one had the rest of the team played as well as him.

Despite not being received well in Chicago, Vazquez had one great year w/ the White Sox

Unlike the others on this list, Vazquez was able to have another great season after his run with the South Siders was over, finishing 4th in the Cy Young voting in 2009 after posting 238 Ks in 219 IPs with Atlanta, with career best ratios in K/BB (5.41) and WHIP (1.03). Granted, he was the most established starter before going to Coop's pitching staff, so his addition to this list may not be appropriate. Still, he was able to post a great season with the team, so some credit should go to Cooper.

Floyd's best season came in 2008, his second w/ the Sox

Gavin Floyd - After three forgettable years with the Phillies, Floyd came to the White Sox with tempered expectations. His 108+ innings pitched in those three years with Philadelphia were packaged with an eye-popping 84 ERs allowed (6.96 ERA). His first year with the Sox wasn't much better, but in year two (2008), something clicked for Floyd. His career year-to-date featured a 17-8 record, 3.84 ERA, 1.26 WHIP came out of nowhere when compared to the 8-10, 6.30, 1.61 career numbers before the season started.

He's been roughly a .500 pitcher since then, never breaking the 4.00 ERA barrier in the past 3.5 seasons on the South Side. Many Sox fans wouldn't mind trying to trade him now. Luckily, his one good season in 2008 helped the White Sox make it to the playoffs for the first time since the World Series season.

Humber needs to channel some of his pitching skills from this day. He has been a wreck since the perfect game.

Philip Humber - Mr. Perfect has been far from it since his perfect game in April, but Humber was able to revive his career in 2011. After having issues staying in the majors and bouncing around three teams in five years, Humber had some decent numbers, maintaining a 2.83 K/BB ratio along w/ a 1.18 WHIP in 163 innings last year, good enough to get him a spot in the rotation for the 2012 season. However, his season has taken a turn for the worst since his perfecto on April 21 - his OPS against since then is a god-awful .890, which makes his 7.01 ERA in that 13 game span make all the more sense.

Some others...Edwin Jackson had a 30 game stint between 2010 and 2011 with Chicago, but didn't do anything overly impressive (11-9, 3.66 ERA, 1.34 WHIP)...Todd Ritchie was the worst pitcher Kenny Williams has ever acquired. Cooper had no chance to polish that turd. All of us Sox fans have done our best to forget about him.

So if I had to guess based on our history of acquiring under-performing, mediocre pitchers, I wouldn't be surprised to see Liriano have a better finish to this season than his start (couldn't get much worse) and have a great season next year (maybe set a career high in innings, wins and ERA) and then tail off sometime in 2014.

Perhaps instead of being overly pessimistic or optimistic, I should instead have cautious optimism and hope that this trend is shown to be true.

B List - Worst Jobs to Post on Your LinkedIn Profile (List 11)

As many of you know, LinkedIn is quite the popular site for people looking to network. People's resumes become visible in a way never seen before. While using the site this week for work purposes, I thought to myself, "What would be the worst jobs to say you worked in hopes of advancing to a bigger and better job?"

Here's seven jobs that people may want to consider deleting from their profiles should they have had the un-fortune of working in that role.

7. Storyboard editor for Saved by the Bell - Have you ever seen the story arcs on this show? If you have, you'd be the first person to discover them. Just off the top of my head, here are some of the most ridiculous ones (which is saying a lot):

• Jessie's brother from New York comes to visit, is originally despised by the crew, including his love interest Lisa. Then basically says, "You know what, I like it here. I think I'll stay." He never appears on another episode.
• Similar situation with Screech's only reciprocated love interest - Violet. The one girl he could possibly score with at Bayside, and they have her on for about one or two episodes? No wonder why Dustin Diamond hates everyone he worked with there.
• A clips episode that shows Zack reflecting on all the great times he had at Malibu Sands over the summer. Of course, Slater is the one (of all Bayside students) to go get Zack to come back to school, only to relax and reminisce about the summer as well. Unless I am completely naive to how the school system works, I'm just guessing that a principal would just let one of his students just leave the school to go retrieve someone who he knows is skipping class. Everyone knows the Ferris Bueller way is how it's done.
• And Tori - yeah. Shows up out of nowhere to replace Kelly and Jesse, whose disappearance is not explained whatsoever. That's not even the most believable part. Do you really think that Zack would go for a biker chick? 

These are only a few of the ridiculous story arcs. I won't even go into the College Years, the standout moment being when Slater learns that he is Chicano from a girl who he never met before, then gets mad at Zack later in the episode for being ignorant of his Chicano culture.

If you have this on your resume, you may want to take it off.

Not sure where this fits into the blog, but this is perhaps one of the best graphs ever made.

6. Musician for Saved by the Bell - Just because the tune and lyrics are easy to get into your head doesn't mean it's a good song. If you need any proof of that, look at just about every #1 Summer song of the past 100 years. I don't know much about music and how to create it, yet I could say that I know more than whoever designed any piece of music associated with this show.

5. Extra on Saved by the Bell (especially the nerd characters) - I always felt sorry for the extras who had to sit in the background of every bullshit scene involving Zack trying to exploit them and his fellow classmates in some way. The nerds had it the worst. They were the stereotypical glasses-wearing, pocket-protector, never-getting laid nerds who got picked on. I still don't know how Screech would fit into that social circle - no way in real life does a social circle, especially in high school, contain a nerd as nerdy as Screech hanging out with jocks and popular kids. I digress.

As I stated, these extras were forced to go to every single social function that Zack and the gang would go to, from the movie theater to the Max and everything in between. I can't say I've ever seen any of those background actors doing anything since then - perhaps The Bell  was a career killer in itself before there was ever a LinkedIn.

One of many uses for Bayside's only classroom

4. Prop designer for Saved by the Bell - Anyone ever find it funny that the classroom that the kids learn in, with normal school desks, is the same classroom that is used for the woodshop class. By golly, it's also where the kids take their drivers ed classes and get to drive a golf cart in order to get their licenses. And the school hallways? Not just for lockers - it's also used for Army-style obstacle courses, locker-type garage sales to help Lisa pay off debt, and also for many Zack Morris "get rich quick" schemes, among many non-traditional school hallway activities.

Couldn't they have built different rooms for these activities to make it just slightly more believable? Perhaps the budget was tight. Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

3. Video Editor for Saved by the Bell - I shouldn't put this so high, especially since they didn't have much to work with in terms of credible story lines and great acting. But you know the editor has to get some flack. After all, he was the one who rendered all the videos, making sure they can be edited in a "made for TV" format. If he or she wanted, a video of better produced shows, like any Bob Saget America's Funniest Home Videos could have been edited into the story line. Sadly, I don't think any Saved by the Bell story lines would have been ruined with random videos of people getting kicked in the nuts or falling off of a boat into a lake. In fact, I think they could have made the stories make more sense.

None of these actors stood a chance of getting future jobs.

2. Actor not named Mario Lopez or Mark-Paul Gosselaar from....you guessed it, Saved by the Bell - Quick: Name three shows or movies that featured any of the Saved by the Bell cast outside of the SBTB shows and movies. I'll even spot you Showgirls  for Elizabeth Berkley and Beverly Hills 90210 featuring Tiffani Amber Thiessen. Give up? Yeah - they've been that bad (or perhaps that typecast). Chances are, if your name is not any of the gentlemen mentioned above, you're probably cleaning gutters or picking up trash for a living at this point (I apologize to all my gutter cleaning and garbageman/women friends of mine for comparing you to SBTB characters). Maybe it has something to do with the childhood actor syndrome of not being able to live a normal life once you've peaked at a young age. Or perhaps it has something to do with them just completely sucking as actors and being lucky to coast on the SBTB wave as long as they did.

Yikes - looks like someone got ran over by a truck. And then by another truck

BTW, have you seen pictures of Lisa (aka Lark Voorhies) recently? I don't think Screech would have been pursuing her if he would have known she was going to look like this. Geesh.

At least he has cool facial hair.

1. Dustin Diamond - Speaking of Screech, he is his own category of "Worst Jobs" for the purposes of this list. Out of all the stereotypes that were exploited on the show, none was worse than the character of Screech, the typical high school nerd that lacks social skills, has no chance with the ladies, especially the only one who he is courting, and who was constantly picked on by his friends, yet still considered them his friends because....uhm, they'd talk to him? I can't think of what he brought to the table as far as being a friend goes or why those others considered Screech a friend.

Can you think of any actor that was typecast or could be typecast as bad as Dustin Diamond was? He had little-to-no shot of ever succeeding after SBTB series were done. He even knew this himself, as he was the only cast member to stay with the series beyond the college series, becoming Mr. Belding's sidekick in the new classes of the show.

His post SBTB resume includes a porn he released creatively called Screeched (if anyone has seen this, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me how bad it was) and also as an author of the book Behind the Bell, in which Diamond reveals all of the sex and drugs that went on behind the scenes of the show. I'm positive everything he said in the book is true, because when he wrote the book, he definitely wasn't hurting for money or looking for attention. Oh wait, nevermind.

Anywho, if your LinkedIn profile features "Dustin Diamond" for some reason as a job, you may want to consider removing it from your profile. Lord knows you won't be getting a job anytime soon anyways.

I guarantee you that if you follow this list, you will get a job and not be employed for long*

*No such guarantees can be made. I cannot be held liable for your shitty resume, interviewing skills, bad breath and excessive sweating while interviewing.

The Ultimate Bolek NFL Preview - 2012 Edition

Mugshot of Marshawn Lynch after his DUI arrest

Has your favorite NFL player been convicted of a crime this offseason? If he hasn't, then he's not trying as hard as he should.

With 27 NFL players being cuffed for some type of offense in the past five months, there's a chance that you're a fan of one of these players. In the past couple weeks alone, Adrian Peterson, Dez Bryant, and Marshawn Lynch, among like 900 others, had some sort of DUI or altercation that seems to be an epidemic as the season approaches.

Aside from that, there were the usual free agent moves. Peyton joining the Mile High Club by heading to the Broncos. Like Kevin Kolb of last year, Matt Flynn cashed in on a couple good starts and signs with an NFC West team desperate for a quarterback. And despite winning the Super Bowl, the Giants are somehow not the talk of New York, as some team who shares a stadium with them traded for a polarizing fullback quarterback that will surely add some drama to an already contentious locker room.

The questions you want to know will be answered below. For my Bears fans, what should you expect from this season? Will my Niners regress this year after a sterling 2011 season that saw them win their first division in almost a decade?

An amazing fact found in this article shows that history is against the Niners (and the Lions & Texans) when it comes to teams who rebounded from sub-.500 records one year to double digit wins the next. Out of the 29 teams who have done this in the past decade, 26 of them regressed to 9 or less wins in year 3. In fact, the average team in this situation loses 4 more games in year 3 than they did in year 2.

I've included my predictions along with what offshore sportsbook 5Dimes is projecting from each team.

Aside from the fact above about regression, if you're betting on totals in the NFL, it's a very profitable angle to bet on the Over for teams projected for less than 6 wins. Keep that in mind if you think that betting on Cleveland, Indianapolis & Jacksonville unders are a layup of a bet.

NFL Predictions

AFC East

Mr GQ will have no problem winning the AFC East

NE (Over/Under 12 wins) - prediction: over (13)
NYJ (Over/Under  8.5) - prediction: under (6)
Buff (Over/Under 7.5) - prediction: over (10)
Mia (Over/Under 7.5) - prediction: under (6)

(Predicted finish: NE 13-3, Buff 10-6, NYJ 6-10, Mia 6-10)


Thoughts: On average, there's about 2 or 3 teams every year that go from losing records to double digit wins. In my projection, I have Buffalo being one of those teams. They made a commitment on the defensive end, shoring up their passing rush by signing defensive ends Mario Williams and Mark Anderson and focused on defense in the first round of the draft. I still don't think they'll be a match for New England, who should continue to be the darlings of the AFC East. I expect the Jets to finish below .500 - I just don't see how having a plan to use two quarterbacks consistently is not going to be a locker room distraction.


AFC North


Pitt (Over/Under 10) - prediction: over (11)
Balt (Over/Under 10) - prediction: under (9)
Cin (Over/Under 8) - prediction: under (7)
Cle (Over/Under 5.5) - prediction: over (6)


(Predicted finish: Pitt 11-5, Balt 9-7, Cin 7-9, Cle 6-10)


Thoughts: If Polamalu & Big Ben stay healthy, I expect the Steelers to win back the AFC North from Baltimore, who lost Defensive Player of the Year Terrell Suggs to a torn Achilles (currently rehabbing it, but likely to miss significant time at the very least). Baltimore should still be a playoff caliber team, but a dip in wins wouldn't surprise me. I expect Cincinnati to have a slight regression in Year 2 of the Andy Dalton era. I think Cleveland will be more competitive than normal, although for them, that still means only about 6 wins.


AFC South


Hou (Over/Under 10) - prediction: over (11)
Ten (Over/Under 7) - prediction: push (7)
Jax (Over/Under 5.5) - prediction: under (3)
Ind (Over/Under 5.5) - prediction: over (6)


(Predicted finish: Hou 11-5, Ten 7-9, Indy 6-10, Jax 3-13)


Thoughts: Outside of the AFC East, this looks like the easiest division to project. Jacksonville & Indianapolis are clearly in rebuilding mode, with the Titans sandwiched in-between them and the Texans, who will likely win their second straight division title after not making the playoffs in their first nine years of existence. They won the division with relative ease last year, and that was without Matt Schaub down the stretch. I expect the Texans to take the next step and be a Super Bowl contender this year.


AFC West


SD (Over/Under 9) - prediction: under (7)
Den (Over/Under 8.5) - prediction: under (7)
KC (Over/Under 8) - prediction: over (10)
Oak (Over/Under 7) - prediction: over (8)


(Predicted finish: KC 10-6, Oak 8-8, SD 7-9, Den 7-9)

Gonna be weird seeing Peyton in orange (and out of the playoffs)

Thoughts: This division has been one of the hardest for me to read and project, but I think the Chiefs will get back to the top of the division. They lost so many folks in the very beginning of 2011 to various ligament tears that they never really had a chance - they somehow rebounded to come close to winning the very weak AFC West. The defensive minded coach (Romeo Crennel) will make a better impression in his second time around as head coach. I don't trust the Chargers to suddenly start doing great under Norv Turner, whose naked pictures of the GM and owners of the team (presumably anyways) allow him to keep coaching the team. I don't think the Broncos have enough talent around Peyton, who himself is coming off a year layoff and his third neck surgery and is nearing NFL extinction. I'll probably come back to eat these words when Peyton throws for 40 TDs.




AFC Playoffs (1-6 seeds): NE, Hou, Pitt, KC, Buff, Balt




NFC East


Phil (Over/Under 10) - prediction: over (12)
NYG (Over/Under 9.5) - prediction: under (7)
Dal (Over/Under 8.5) - prediction: over (9)
Wash (Over/Under 6.5) - prediction: over (7)


(Predicted Finish: Phil 12-4, Dal 9-7, NYG 7-9, Wash 7-9)


Thoughts: I'm drinking the Eagles Kool-Aid for the second year in a row. Unlike last year though, I feel like I'll be right this time around. I don't doubt their chances to win the division as long as Vick can stay healthy, which has always been a question for him in his career. I think the Giants will take a big step back (note how I didn't go with the pun of GIANT step back). Dallas will be on the fringe of the playoffs again, and Tony Romo will be to blame (as always). RGIII will bring some life to a Redskins franchise that hasn't been a perennial contender for the playoffs since the late 80s/early 90s.


NFC North


GB (Over/Under 12) - prediction: under (11)
Det (Over/Under 9.5) - prediction: under (9)
Chi (Over/Under 9.5) - prediction: over (11)
Min (Over/Under 6) - prediction: under (4)

If I have anything to say, these two will be all smiles come January

(Predicted Finish: Chicago 11-5 (wins tiebreaker), Green Bay 11-5, Det 9-7, Min 4-12)


Thoughts: My Bears friends are probably going to blame me if they fail to live up to higher than normal expectations, but I believe they got better pieces than last year and should benefit from better health w/ Cutler and Forte (who with his new contract, hopefully will not suffer from Chris Johnsonitis), which is what cost them a chance at the playoffs down the stretch last year. Their defense is never something that needs questioning, as that has been Lovie's forte (pun somewhat intended). Green Bay's offense hid some of the flaws that their defense showed last year. The offense should still be its juggernaut self, but I believe that with the rest of the division (save Minnesota) is catching up with them, it will be difficult for them to get over 12 wins.


NFC South

Expect to see this shirt (or a version of it) worn all year in NO

New Orleans (Over/Under 10) - prediction: over (11)
Atlanta (Over/Under 9) - prediction: under (7)
Carolina (Over/Under 7.5) - prediction: over (9)
Tampa (Over/Under 6) - prediction: push (6)


(Predicted Finish: New Orleans 11-5, Carolina 9-7, Atlanta 7-9, Tampa 6-10)


Thoughts: At first, I was on the bandwagon that New Orleans would be distracted this season by the bounty stuff and miss out on the playoffs. However, the more I thought about it and realized that New Orleans' home field is going to be even more crazy with their "us against the world" mentality that they have with their coach being suspended for the year, the more I thought to myself - I could easily see them go 7-1 or even 8-0 again at home, especially with the way Brees slings it. I expect Carolina to take a big step forward and Atlanta take a step back, which will result in Mike Smith being fired at the end of the year.


NFC West

San Fran (Over/Under 10) - prediction: under (9)
Arizona (Over/Under 7) - prediction: over (8)
Seattle (Over/Under 7) - prediction: under (5)
St. Louis (Over/Under 6) - prediction: under (4)


(Predicted Finish: San Fran 9-7, Arizona 8-8, Seattle 5-11, St. Louis 4-12)

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see Randy Moss making a big impact for the Niners

Thoughts: San Francisco benefited from an improbable +28 turnover ratio and great health last year (only 8 total games missed by defensive starters). The turnover rate will go down, but it's possible that the lack of defensive injuries will not. I found that the Niners' string of "luck" in the health dept is no fluke - between 2008-2010, the starters only missed 16 total games on defense: source. Even though with their signings on offense are pointing towards an improvement in production, I expect a regression for Alex Smith (17 TDs, 5 picks last year) which will negate some of the signings. Arizona finished the season out strong with John Skelton behind center, winning 7 of their last 9 games. I wouldn't be surprised if the Week 17 showdown between the Niners and the Cardinals is for the division title.

NFC Playoffs (1-6 Seeds): Phil, NO, Chi, SF, GB, Det




AFC Wild Card: Pitt over Balt, KC over Buff
NFC Wild Card: Chi over Det, GB over SF
AFC Divisionals: Hou over Pitt, NE over KC
NFC Divisionals:  Phil over GB, NO over Chi


AFC Championship: Hou over NE
NFC Championship: Phil over NO


Super Bowl: Phil over Hou


League MVP: Mike Vick (Phil)
Offensive Player of the Year: Drew Brees (NO)
Defensive Player of the Year: Julius Peppers (Chi)
Offensive Rookie of the Year: Andrew Luck (Indy)
Defensive Rookie of the Year: Morris Claiborne (Dallas)

Thoughts: Out of these 12 playoff teams, I guarantee I miss on 6 of them, maybe more. I went with the rule of thumb that there's usually about 4 new division winners from the previous year (I got Pittsburgh, Kansas City, Chicago & Philly fitting that bill). After my blog earlier last month about teams with value, I think New Orleans may have tremendous value on winning the Super Bowl, especially since the Big Game is in their home stadium. Imagine the noise that the AFC squad would have to deal with. I may make a futures bet on the Saints before the season starts, because it will get lower if they make a strong push as they did last year). If I could take that blog back, I'd have them as my best value team.

I'm expecting Vick to lead the Eagles to a Super Bowl title this year

Why the Eagles winning it all? I think I'm falling prey to how they closed and their overall level of talent at the skill positions. Maclin had medical issues that prevented him from being effective like he was in 2010. This prediction will probably flame out badly. Vick has problems staying healthy, but if he does, I think he will live up to his dumb comments (at least for one year) about the Eagles being a possible dynasty.

Why the Texans over Patriots in the AFC Championship? Lately it seems that the Patriots fall a step short and have one lackluster playoff game that does them in. I'm projecting that from them in this game, as the Texans will pull off an upset and make it to the Super Bowl.

Strange as it sounds, I still may opt to bet for the Saints to win it all instead of the Eagles.

Odds are, there will be a few teams that catch everyone off-guard. I only picked 4 new teams to make the playoffs compared to last year - usually it changes by 6-7 teams. So if I didn't pick your team to make it there, you have some hope.

Enjoy your NFL seasons, and I'm sure I'll be back throughout the year to critique or praise my predictions.

B List - 10 Months (List 10)

I swear I didn't plan my 10th list to have this title, but it has this name for a reason. Today is the 10 month mark in me and Jen's relationship. Everything is going great so far. We're both still very happy together, and our new living arrangement has been a success.

I figured I'd highlight 10 days (1 day in each month) of our relationship, without getting too sappy and make people want to vomit. I'll just go chronologically:

1. September 20, 2011 - Of course, I have to highlight this date.  I've written about it before, but there's a few random things I forgot if I mentioned before: (a) We went to DMK, a burger joint that Jen said she never would have suggested if she knew how picky I was. (b) I remember making a comment about someone holding the door open for us, saying (in a joking way) that I wish I would have been able to do it since she talked up chivalry in her dating profile. (c) Watching the movie Bridesmaids was probably the only time I've ever enjoyed a "chick flick" and would actually want to watch it again (although we haven't).

Me and the Bud Man

2. October 1, 2011 - This being one of the sadder days of my life, it felt good having someone I could talk to and comfort me. This was the day that my family and I put our dog Buddy down. I still occasionally look at the blog I wrote in his honor the day he died and get teary-eyed. The day was made easier when I went to go hang out with her downtown and meet some of her friends for the first time. Not exactly the best day to meet people for the first time with all the emotions going through my mind. But I'm glad I did go downtown that day - it helped me get my mind off of the sadness encountered earlier in the day and it was the first time I got to meet some of Jen's great friends.

3. November 11, 2011 - She's gonna hate that I forgot the name of the Cajun restaurant we went to on her birthday, but I enjoyed the steak that I ate and I was very happy that she was able to eat some food that we don't normally go out for - given my very particular food tastes. It was the first in a weekend of birthday stuff for her weekend, including going to see a comedy show and capped off by a Bears game.

4. December 23, 2011 - The day before we were supposed to go to over to her Mom's for Christmas stuff, we hung out and decided that we would start our own Christmas tradition of opening one gift on the 23rd - our own Festivus tradition. I had her open my gift of elephant figurines that I bought for her and knew she would like. I received a "Bazinga!" t-shirt that I proudly wear around to this day. It was a great start to the Christmas season.

5. January 1, 2012 - It was the first New Year's in a while that I had a date to kiss, so I definitely enjoyed that part of it. I am glad that she was open to going to my friend's party for the new year, especially a party where she only knew a few people. And best yet - she was willing to be the designated driver! What a sweetheart. But the best part of the night was going to White Castle to ring in the new year. Now that's true romance.

The Bear and The Roses

6. February 14, 2012 - Like the previous occasion, I hadn't had a Valentine on the Hallmark holiday in a while. And yes, while I was single, I shunned the holiday and didn't think much of it. I didn't do anything over-the-top Hollywood on this day - just bought her a huge teddy bear and some flowers. She made me a delicious dinner. We stayed in and watched TV - my idea of romance.

The Bunny & His Babe

7.  March 31, 2012 - We went over to Jen's aunt and uncle's in Princeton, IL and I agreed to play the role of the Easter Bunny for Jen's cousin's kid. I had a blast, as you can see based on this picture. Easter was over a week away, but the family wanted to celebrate it a week early. It was yet another great time had in the presence of her family. I make a sexy bunny. Paging Hugh Hefner.

8. April 7, 2012 - We signed our lives away for a year...the official day of me and Jen signing off on our current place. One of the most expensive decisions I've ever made - but also one of the best. No regrets on that front.

The cat getting in the way of moving

9. May 31, 2012 - Crazy day of moving Jen and myself out of our respective places. See all the boxes piled in the moving truck and my dad's van made me realize that we were taking our relationship to the next level - moving in together. It is hard to believe that it took me so long to move out, but I believe I was always looking for the right situation. Apparently the right situation took 25+ years of living in the parent's place.

Grillmaster

10.  June 18, 2012 - Let's be honest - it didn't become our place until the first grilling session. It was the first meal I was able to cook for us - and funny, neither of us remember whether it was brats or hamburgers. Either way it was delicious meat. Along with a beer in hand, who could ask for a better scenario?

As you can see, there's been plenty of days over the months that have been awesome at the same time. And many more to look forward to.

And to those who notice this list is 3 items longer than normal - you're right. I bent the rule on this one. So sue me.

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.