I happened upon ESPN Radio on the Deuce this morning while trying to enjoy my breakfast, and guess what? They were ragging on the National League's West Division again. Although the tide has turned a bit since this post, and the NL East now has more wins than the NL West, the real culprit dragging down the National League is the Central.
The Dodgers are in a virtual tie with St. Louis for the second best record in the NL, and the Padres have a better record than Cincinnati. San Francisco and Houston have identical records, Arizona's is better than Milwaukee's, and Colorado's is far better than both Chicago's and Pittsburgh's. So if anybody's making the playoffs in undeserved fashion, it's the Cardinals, right?
Except the Cardinals are only 32-32 against their Central division foes, worse on average than most of the rest of the NL (Philadelphia is also at .500, Washington is 16-17, and Colorado is 14-22). St. Louis has stayed afloat in the Central by beating up (19-6) on the NL West. Go figure.
It may be about time to haul out the annual rant against interleague play and the unbalanced schedule, two too-often-praised Bud Selig brainchildren. These two intrusions into pure baseball both introduce inconsistencies in "strength of schedule" for the various teams.
A big part of the problem is the realignment that put Milwaukee in the National League and created one six-team division (namely, the woeful NL Central) and one four-team division (the AL West) so that each league would have an even number of teams. The result of this stupidity is that AL teams each play 18 interleague games, but most NL teams play 15. That in itself is okay, since comparisons between AL and NL records never count for anything. The problem is the "most". The exceptions this year are Philly, Florida, Washington, and Houston, who played 18 apiece. None of these teams is over .500 in those 18 games (Florida is 9-9). In the whole National League, only San Francisco (8-7) and Colorado (11-4) were over .500. So basically the Phillies and Astros were handed three extra games that they were likely to lose. I'm sure they're thanking Selig for that as they make their run at the wild card.
If there were 15 teams in each league, there would have to be at least one interleague series happening all the time, but that would be okay, because a total of 252 interleague games are played. And the imbalance would disappear.
The unbalanced schedule is only deplorable because of that other recent addition, the wild card. (There's also the home field advantage issue, but that at least doesn't change who makes the playoffs.) Cincinnati and San Diego (the current front-runners) will be measured by their overall records, even though they are achieved against very different opponents. Cincy is 38-30 against their own division, and 8-14 against the West. The Padres are 28-30 against the West, and 17-9 against the Central. If we were to (naively, I admit) average their winning percentages against the three divisions to create a "balanced" schedule (throwing out interleague play, where they are close anyway), the Reds would have a .480 record, while the Padres would be at .536. Instead the Padres have a piddling 1.5 game lead.
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Friday, August 25, 2006
Willy make it?
Willy Taveras of the Houston Astros has hit safely in twenty-seven straight games. He's the latest to threaten a thirty-game hitting streak. All current streaks can be found at Baseball Musings. Unless you've been cruising around the world in an unpowered sailboat, you already know that Chase Utley put together a thirty-five game streak earlier this season, and Jimmy Rollins, his Phillies teammate, extended his streak to thirty-eight in the first two games of the season.
What you may not know about hitting streaks of this caliber is just how rare they are in Major League Baseball. Stretching all the way back to 1876, only forty-one such streaks have occurred. Two players—Ty Cobb and George Sisler—own two apiece. No one else has done it more than once. In the chart below, you can see another curiosity: there were no 30-game hitting streaks between 1950 and 1969. That's an eighteen-year drought! If anyone wants to try to explain this, I'm listening.
While we're happily looking at charts, here's the histogram of hitting streak lengths. 
So, just how likely is Taveras to join this club? Of those who have reached 30 games, more than two-thirds (68.3%) have reached 31. And of those, three-quarters have made 32. Here are the percentages:
If you're hitting around .400, which many of these guys are during such a streak, and you get four at bats in a game, you have about an 87% chance of continuing your streak on any given night, assuming approximate independence among at bats. But Taveras is only hitting .339 during his streak, so he's right at 80% for four at bats. Three more games at 80% each is just about even odds.
What you may not know about hitting streaks of this caliber is just how rare they are in Major League Baseball. Stretching all the way back to 1876, only forty-one such streaks have occurred. Two players—Ty Cobb and George Sisler—own two apiece. No one else has done it more than once. In the chart below, you can see another curiosity: there were no 30-game hitting streaks between 1950 and 1969. That's an eighteen-year drought! If anyone wants to try to explain this, I'm listening.
While we're happily looking at charts, here's the histogram of hitting streak lengths. 
So, just how likely is Taveras to join this club? Of those who have reached 30 games, more than two-thirds (68.3%) have reached 31. And of those, three-quarters have made 32. Here are the percentages: | Games | % Moving On |
|---|---|
| 30 | 68 |
| 31 | 75 |
| 32 | 100 |
| 33 | 81 |
| 34 | 82 |
| 35 | 64 |
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
Bush-Whacked!
>From what I hear, the Madden player rankings are out and Reggie Bush edged out Mario Williams again. The former NC State star can't catch a break!
I don't know that I've ever seen Mario Williams play, so I'm not going to sing his praises. But, he must be talented if the Texans took him #1 overall. And, I don't have a problem with criticism of Williams or praise of Bush. However, evaluate them on a level playing field.
Offensive and defensive players can contribute without putting up big numbers. Elite cornerbacks usually don't have a lot of interceptions because they don't get challenged as much as CB's who are thought less of by opposing offenses. If a defensive end gets doubled and triple teamed all game and doesn't get a sack, but the guy on the other side who sees one-on-one blocking the entire game gets three sacks, who had the better game? If the defense pays so much attention to Randy Moss that the other receiver and running back are a ! ble to have big games, are you going to criticize Moss if he only catches a few balls?
Reggie Bush was still receiving tons of praise for his 4 carries for 7 yards and 2 receptions for 14 yards performance against the Cowboys Monday night. Those aren't good numbers. Bush's 9 yard run (his other three were for -2 yards) was okay, but not worthy of heaps of praise. He made one solid cut and then stumbled forward for a few more yards. Plus, Bush was credited with being a decoy (CB Newman bit on a play-action fake) on a nice completion from Drew Brees to Joe Horn. Would the same thing have happened on a fake to Deuce McAllister? It's definitely possible, Deuce is a pretty good back.
Give Williams a break ... it's the pre-season and he doesn't have the talent around him that Bush does (Brees, Deuce, Horn). He may struggle this year, he may play well and struggle to accumulate stats, or he may light up the stat sheet. I'm pretty sure I know what ESPN! will say about Bush, though.
I don't know that I've ever seen Mario Williams play, so I'm not going to sing his praises. But, he must be talented if the Texans took him #1 overall. And, I don't have a problem with criticism of Williams or praise of Bush. However, evaluate them on a level playing field.
Offensive and defensive players can contribute without putting up big numbers. Elite cornerbacks usually don't have a lot of interceptions because they don't get challenged as much as CB's who are thought less of by opposing offenses. If a defensive end gets doubled and triple teamed all game and doesn't get a sack, but the guy on the other side who sees one-on-one blocking the entire game gets three sacks, who had the better game? If the defense pays so much attention to Randy Moss that the other receiver and running back are a ! ble to have big games, are you going to criticize Moss if he only catches a few balls?
Reggie Bush was still receiving tons of praise for his 4 carries for 7 yards and 2 receptions for 14 yards performance against the Cowboys Monday night. Those aren't good numbers. Bush's 9 yard run (his other three were for -2 yards) was okay, but not worthy of heaps of praise. He made one solid cut and then stumbled forward for a few more yards. Plus, Bush was credited with being a decoy (CB Newman bit on a play-action fake) on a nice completion from Drew Brees to Joe Horn. Would the same thing have happened on a fake to Deuce McAllister? It's definitely possible, Deuce is a pretty good back.
Give Williams a break ... it's the pre-season and he doesn't have the talent around him that Bush does (Brees, Deuce, Horn). He may struggle this year, he may play well and struggle to accumulate stats, or he may light up the stat sheet. I'm pretty sure I know what ESPN! will say about Bush, though.
Who's MVP of this tired rivalry?
Michael Wilbon and a Kornheiser substitute (Le Batard) "debated" the AL MVP last night on Pardon the Interruption. The question was "Jeter or Ortiz?" I don't suppose it's fair to hold PTI to a higher standard than the rest of sports media, but they're going to have to suffer my discontent this time. Jeter or Ortiz? Why does it always have to be Yankees vs. Red Sox?
It seems like every time I turn on a ball game, it's the Yankees and the Red Sox. ESPN and Fox both cater to "Red Sox nation" and the teeming hordes of whatever you call Yankees "fans" every time they get a chance. Well, I, for one, am tired of it. This rivalry was cool two years ago. Now it's like a bad joke that you've already heard one time too many.
The Yankees and Red Sox are not the best teams in the American League anymore. Nor do they play in the best division. In fact, both the Central and the West have more wins on average than the East. (In case you're wondering, the best division in the NL by this measure is . . . surprise! . . . the West.)
Let's drop these losers. The White Sox, not the Red Sox, are the defending World Series champions. Did you forget last year? And the Tigers, the lowly Detroit Tigers, have the best record in baseball, not the damn Yankees! I want to see this rivalry play out. Who cares if the Yankees swept the Red Sox? That just corroborates what we already knew—when you average it all out, payroll wins. Wasn't it more interesting when the (White) Sox swept the Tigers, closing the gap instead of widening it?
Joe Mauer leads the league in hitting, not Derek Jeter. Why are we even considering this guy? Because he's the only one we've seen play? It's time to slough this media-imposed tunnel vision and consider a wider purview on the American League. Let's look past the triple crown categories and find the player who is really most valuable. There's a good chance he's playing in the Central Division.
It seems like every time I turn on a ball game, it's the Yankees and the Red Sox. ESPN and Fox both cater to "Red Sox nation" and the teeming hordes of whatever you call Yankees "fans" every time they get a chance. Well, I, for one, am tired of it. This rivalry was cool two years ago. Now it's like a bad joke that you've already heard one time too many.
The Yankees and Red Sox are not the best teams in the American League anymore. Nor do they play in the best division. In fact, both the Central and the West have more wins on average than the East. (In case you're wondering, the best division in the NL by this measure is . . . surprise! . . . the West.)
Let's drop these losers. The White Sox, not the Red Sox, are the defending World Series champions. Did you forget last year? And the Tigers, the lowly Detroit Tigers, have the best record in baseball, not the damn Yankees! I want to see this rivalry play out. Who cares if the Yankees swept the Red Sox? That just corroborates what we already knew—when you average it all out, payroll wins. Wasn't it more interesting when the (White) Sox swept the Tigers, closing the gap instead of widening it?
Joe Mauer leads the league in hitting, not Derek Jeter. Why are we even considering this guy? Because he's the only one we've seen play? It's time to slough this media-imposed tunnel vision and consider a wider purview on the American League. Let's look past the triple crown categories and find the player who is really most valuable. There's a good chance he's playing in the Central Division.
Monday, August 21, 2006
No sneaking Tiger, this one
Gene Wojciechowski says Tiger Woods is the greatest individual athlete ever, and points, among other things, to his 12/12 record in Majors when he has or shares the lead after three days. That's all great. But what about when he doesn't lead after three days? He's 0 for life!
Wojciechowski compares Tiger to Michael Jordan. What if MJ and the Bulls had only ever won NBA Finals games that they led after three quarters? Sure, it would be a great accomplishment just to win every such game. (Jordan and company played far more than twelve, though, so even if they were as good, they'd be far less likely to be undefeated.) But only those games? That probably doesn't equate to six championships. Maybe it does. Somebody should check.
There are some straightforward conclusions to draw here. Tiger Woods is obviously the best prepared golfer that we have yet seen. He's among the best prepared of all athletes. Woods is to golf as Michael Jackson was to music. His father cultivated his skills practically from birth. Who else can say that?
It comes as no surprise that he is capable of dominating the field. And when he dominates the field, he wins majors. 12/12. But when he hasn't had his A game, or when someone else has enjoyed three days of good luck, he doesn't. Tiger can't be the greatest athlete ever until he can win those tournaments that he doesn't dominate. After all, those are far more common.
Then again, I know next to nothing about golf.
Wojciechowski compares Tiger to Michael Jordan. What if MJ and the Bulls had only ever won NBA Finals games that they led after three quarters? Sure, it would be a great accomplishment just to win every such game. (Jordan and company played far more than twelve, though, so even if they were as good, they'd be far less likely to be undefeated.) But only those games? That probably doesn't equate to six championships. Maybe it does. Somebody should check.
There are some straightforward conclusions to draw here. Tiger Woods is obviously the best prepared golfer that we have yet seen. He's among the best prepared of all athletes. Woods is to golf as Michael Jackson was to music. His father cultivated his skills practically from birth. Who else can say that?
It comes as no surprise that he is capable of dominating the field. And when he dominates the field, he wins majors. 12/12. But when he hasn't had his A game, or when someone else has enjoyed three days of good luck, he doesn't. Tiger can't be the greatest athlete ever until he can win those tournaments that he doesn't dominate. After all, those are far more common.
Then again, I know next to nothing about golf.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Rant and rave!
I know PTI is just T.K. and Michael Wilbon bantering back and forth. But, Wilbon's bashing of Terrell Owens is out of control. He is so pro-McNabb and anti-Owens that no matter what Owens does, Wilbon is going to blow it out of proportion. What I found to be especially loathsome was Wilbon defending Tom Brady sticking up for WR Deion Branch. McNabb didn't help TO get a new contract after he came back from an injury that would have ended most players' seasons to play, and play great, in the Super Bowl. Branch has a contract, just as Owens did. Branch wanted a better deal, just like Owens did. Why praise Brady for going against management to get his go-to guy a little more money if you praised McNabb for not supporting Owens in his holdout? It seems like a double standard to me.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Back on the Apple
I'll try to hit a number of topics, so, if you don't like one, just skip ahead to the next paragraph.
I'm not sure which is worse: a) the excuses given by Floyd Landis and his camp or b) the jump to condemn Landis of cheating. I'm not a chemist (I did have the highest score in my college chemistry I and II classes though), but it seems odd to me that Landis would only test positive once for synthetic testosterone. I wouldn't think Landis would decide one day, hundreds of miles into the tour, that he was going to start cheating. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't realize that it probably wouldn't help him. Maybe he thought he was done being tested. Or, maybe he's telling the truth and he has no idea why his urine would test positive. Is there any chance the people at the lab doing the tests have something against Floyd Landis?
Moving on to Norman, OK, where Rhett Bomar and his "job" at a local car dealership may have pissed the season a! way for the Sooners. Bob Stoops was 100% correct kicking Bomar off his squad. In his two years in Norman, one as a redshirt and one as the starting QB, Bomar was twice cited for underage drinking. Then, his unearned income came to light. Three strikes and you're out. Bomar didn't learn that he wasn't above the law ... I would think that being cited for drinking in Norman would have prevented most people from putting themselves in a situation to be caught drinking at a Hornets game in OKC. Not Bomar. Stoops isn't Bomar's babysitter. He isn't Bomar's dad. Stoops is the head coach of a national powerhouse college football team. He is also a husband and father. It isn't Stoops' job to know where all his players work during the summer. The players know what they can and can't do ... Bomar got caught trying to cheat the system. What is Stoops going to say to the boosters the next time OU losses to Texas? "Sorry, I was too busy checking up with players at the! ir summer jobs and walking them to class to devote time to recruiting, film study and all my other football-related duties." Yeah, that's going to fly. And "No!", Stoops shouldn't have just suspended Bomar. This is the best thing for the school, the program, and Bomar. Can you imagine the reception Bomar would get if he returned next year if OU fans believe his transgressions cost them a national title this year and then he didn't have a fantastic season (which would be likely if he's suspended all this year)? It wouldn't be peaches 'n cream.
Coach K has USA Basketball on the right track. The United States still has the best basketball talent (and players) on the planet. Will Coach K's squad win the upcoming World Championships? Maybe, maybe not. But, the emphasis on playing good defense and sharing the ball is the right strategy when you have guys like Dwayne Wade, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Joe Johnson, Shane Battier, Bruce Bowen, Chris Paul, etc. I wouldn't want to have to try to score against athlet! es like that. It is important that the players are dedicated to playing good defense, on and off the ball, and let their defense fuel an unstoppable transition game. The USA team should be able to pressure the ball, get out in passing lanes, be in good position chasing shooters off screens, and challenge and block shots. It will come down to focus and dedication ... I guess we'll see if Coach K can instill those qualities in his team before the important games start. Looks promising so far.
I'm not sure which is worse: a) the excuses given by Floyd Landis and his camp or b) the jump to condemn Landis of cheating. I'm not a chemist (I did have the highest score in my college chemistry I and II classes though), but it seems odd to me that Landis would only test positive once for synthetic testosterone. I wouldn't think Landis would decide one day, hundreds of miles into the tour, that he was going to start cheating. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't realize that it probably wouldn't help him. Maybe he thought he was done being tested. Or, maybe he's telling the truth and he has no idea why his urine would test positive. Is there any chance the people at the lab doing the tests have something against Floyd Landis?
Moving on to Norman, OK, where Rhett Bomar and his "job" at a local car dealership may have pissed the season a! way for the Sooners. Bob Stoops was 100% correct kicking Bomar off his squad. In his two years in Norman, one as a redshirt and one as the starting QB, Bomar was twice cited for underage drinking. Then, his unearned income came to light. Three strikes and you're out. Bomar didn't learn that he wasn't above the law ... I would think that being cited for drinking in Norman would have prevented most people from putting themselves in a situation to be caught drinking at a Hornets game in OKC. Not Bomar. Stoops isn't Bomar's babysitter. He isn't Bomar's dad. Stoops is the head coach of a national powerhouse college football team. He is also a husband and father. It isn't Stoops' job to know where all his players work during the summer. The players know what they can and can't do ... Bomar got caught trying to cheat the system. What is Stoops going to say to the boosters the next time OU losses to Texas? "Sorry, I was too busy checking up with players at the! ir summer jobs and walking them to class to devote time to recruiting, film study and all my other football-related duties." Yeah, that's going to fly. And "No!", Stoops shouldn't have just suspended Bomar. This is the best thing for the school, the program, and Bomar. Can you imagine the reception Bomar would get if he returned next year if OU fans believe his transgressions cost them a national title this year and then he didn't have a fantastic season (which would be likely if he's suspended all this year)? It wouldn't be peaches 'n cream.
Coach K has USA Basketball on the right track. The United States still has the best basketball talent (and players) on the planet. Will Coach K's squad win the upcoming World Championships? Maybe, maybe not. But, the emphasis on playing good defense and sharing the ball is the right strategy when you have guys like Dwayne Wade, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Joe Johnson, Shane Battier, Bruce Bowen, Chris Paul, etc. I wouldn't want to have to try to score against athlet! es like that. It is important that the players are dedicated to playing good defense, on and off the ball, and let their defense fuel an unstoppable transition game. The USA team should be able to pressure the ball, get out in passing lanes, be in good position chasing shooters off screens, and challenge and block shots. It will come down to focus and dedication ... I guess we'll see if Coach K can instill those qualities in his team before the important games start. Looks promising so far.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
