Comments on: playoffs, round two http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2004/10/playoffs-round-two/ Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:06:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: David Carlton http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2004/10/playoffs-round-two/#comment-19 David Carlton Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:35:15 +0000 /?p=19#comment-19 I guess I am starting to switch my allegiance to the A's, yes. Though when they start losing and the Indians start winning, I'll be happy to switch back! Seriously, though, I like both teams, but it's a lot easier to follow the A's than the Indians out here, and I've set down enough roots here that changing allegiances isn't so unreasonable. I was really anti-Brewers a couple of years ago, largely because of Bud Selig but partly because they had a crappy GM. I seem to vaguely recall hearing that they're fixing both of those issues, though, which means that they'll switch categories into the mass of NL Central teams that I don't have strong feelings about one way or another. The Yankees firing Vazquez is a not-hopelessly-implausible happy scenario, now that you bring it up. The A's couldn't afford A-Rod, and in any even their current SS, Bobby Crosby, is the Rookie of the Year favorite, so he's not going anywhere. He would make a nice upgrade for the Indians over Omar Vizquel, though... (Not that I think the Indians would pay that kind of money either.) I was going to protest your claiming that the Orioles had the best 3B-SS combo in the league - what about the Yankees (despite Jeter's overratedness), or even the A's (though that's a stretch, but wait for Bobby Crosby to get a couple of years older)? But then I looked at the numbers, and I do believe you are correct. (Hmm: going from an OPS in the 700's to an OPS in the 900's in the age 31/32 seasons. That's pretty unusual.) I guess I am starting to switch my allegiance to the A’s, yes. Though when they start losing and the Indians start winning, I’ll be happy to switch back! Seriously, though, I like both teams, but it’s a lot easier to follow the A’s than the Indians out here, and I’ve set down enough roots here that changing allegiances isn’t so unreasonable.

I was really anti-Brewers a couple of years ago, largely because of Bud Selig but partly because they had a crappy GM. I seem to vaguely recall hearing that they’re fixing both of those issues, though, which means that they’ll switch categories into the mass of NL Central teams that I don’t have strong feelings about one way or another.

The Yankees firing Vazquez is a not-hopelessly-implausible happy scenario, now that you bring it up. The A’s couldn’t afford A-Rod, and in any even their current SS, Bobby Crosby, is the Rookie of the Year favorite, so he’s not going anywhere. He would make a nice upgrade for the Indians over Omar Vizquel, though… (Not that I think the Indians would pay that kind of money either.)

I was going to protest your claiming that the Orioles had the best 3B-SS combo in the league - what about the Yankees (despite Jeter’s overratedness), or even the A’s (though that’s a stretch, but wait for Bobby Crosby to get a couple of years older)? But then I looked at the numbers, and I do believe you are correct. (Hmm: going from an OPS in the 700’s to an OPS in the 900’s in the age 31/32 seasons. That’s pretty unusual.)

]]> By: J. Ellenberg http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2004/10/playoffs-round-two/#comment-18 J. Ellenberg Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:02:47 +0000 /?p=19#comment-18 Oh, I was totally referring to the Indians. I agree that the West is just as hard. Have you actually started to switch your primary allegiance? Happily for me, we are moving to a National League town (assuming you consider Madison in the orbit of Milwaukee) so I should be able to smoothly adopt the Brewers as my NL team of choice without any cognitive dissonance. My hope for the Orioles is that Steinbrenner will go nuts, decide his expensive free agents are all losers, and give us Javier Vazquez at a deep discount. Who knows, maybe he'll fire Rodriguez too; but since the Orioles have arguably the best 3B-SS combo in the league already, we'd probably pass; could the Indians or A's need a shortstop? Oh, I was totally referring to the Indians. I agree that the West is just as hard. Have you actually started to switch your primary allegiance?

Happily for me, we are moving to a National League town (assuming you consider Madison in the orbit of Milwaukee) so I should be able to smoothly adopt the Brewers as my NL team of choice without any cognitive dissonance.

My hope for the Orioles is that Steinbrenner will go nuts, decide his expensive free agents are all losers, and give us Javier Vazquez at a deep discount. Who knows, maybe he’ll fire Rodriguez too; but since the Orioles have arguably the best 3B-SS combo in the league already, we’d probably pass; could the Indians or A’s need a shortstop?

]]> By: David Carlton http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2004/10/playoffs-round-two/#comment-17 David Carlton Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:09:32 +0000 /?p=19#comment-17 If by "my team" you mean the Indians, then of course you are right: the AL Central is a weak division, and I certainly hope the Indians take advantage of that next year. If by "my team" you mean the A's, then you're crazy: the AL West in recent years has always had at least two good teams, and this year there were three good teams slogging it out with only one lousy team. Whereas the AL East has had two good teams, one decent team, and two lousy teams. I'm not sure it's easier being in the East than in the West recently, but I don't think it's any harder. Hmm: at least that's what memory says - let's look at standings. The top three teams in each divison for the last five years, with winning percentages: 2004 West: Anaheim .568, Oakland .562, Texas .549.<br /> 2004 East: NY .623, Boston .605, Baltimore .481.<br /> 2004 Wildcard: East. 2003 West: Oakland .593, Seattle .574, Anaheim .475.<br /> 2003 East: New York .623, Boston .586, Toronto .531.<br /> 2003 Wildcard: East. 2002 West: Oakland .636, Anaheim .611, Seattle .574.<br /> 2002 East: New York .640, Boston .574, Toronto .481.<br /> 2002 Wildcard: West. 2001 West: Seattle .716, Oakland .630, Anaheim .463.<br /> 2001 East: New York .594, Boston .509, Toronto .494.<br /> 2001 Wildcard: West. 2000 West: Oakland .565, Seattle .562, Anaheim .506.<br /> 2000 East: New York .540, Boston .525, Toronto .512.<br /> 2000 Wildcard: West. Looks pretty even to me. The main difference, of course, is that in the East you always have the same two teams at the top, while in the West Oakland, Seattle, and Anaheim have all been competitive for some of those five years (and I'm certainly not counting out Texas for next year). But just because you're always in the shadow of the Red Sox and Yankees doesn't mean that those two teams are better than what the West has to offer: just look at those 2001 numbers again. Either way, props to the Orioles for causing Kevin Brown to break his hand, and for their improvement this year. Who knows - maybe the Yankees will implode next year and the O's will make it into the playoffs! If by “my team” you mean the Indians, then of course you are right: the AL Central is a weak division, and I certainly hope the Indians take advantage of that next year. If by “my team” you mean the A’s, then you’re crazy: the AL West in recent years has always had at least two good teams, and this year there were three good teams slogging it out with only one lousy team. Whereas the AL East has had two good teams, one decent team, and two lousy teams. I’m not sure it’s easier being in the East than in the West recently, but I don’t think it’s any harder.

Hmm: at least that’s what memory says - let’s look at standings. The top three teams in each divison for the last five years, with winning percentages:

2004 West: Anaheim .568, Oakland .562, Texas .549.
2004 East: NY .623, Boston .605, Baltimore .481.
2004 Wildcard: East.

2003 West: Oakland .593, Seattle .574, Anaheim .475.
2003 East: New York .623, Boston .586, Toronto .531.
2003 Wildcard: East.

2002 West: Oakland .636, Anaheim .611, Seattle .574.
2002 East: New York .640, Boston .574, Toronto .481.
2002 Wildcard: West.

2001 West: Seattle .716, Oakland .630, Anaheim .463.
2001 East: New York .594, Boston .509, Toronto .494.
2001 Wildcard: West.

2000 West: Oakland .565, Seattle .562, Anaheim .506.
2000 East: New York .540, Boston .525, Toronto .512.
2000 Wildcard: West.

Looks pretty even to me. The main difference, of course, is that in the East you always have the same two teams at the top, while in the West Oakland, Seattle, and Anaheim have all been competitive for some of those five years (and I’m certainly not counting out Texas for next year). But just because you’re always in the shadow of the Red Sox and Yankees doesn’t mean that those two teams are better than what the West has to offer: just look at those 2001 numbers again.

Either way, props to the Orioles for causing Kevin Brown to break his hand, and for their improvement this year. Who knows - maybe the Yankees will implode next year and the O’s will make it into the playoffs!

]]> By: J. Ellenberg http://malvasiabianca.org/archives/2004/10/playoffs-round-two/#comment-16 J. Ellenberg Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:31:05 +0000 /?p=19#comment-16 Though to be fair, one reason you like the unbalanced schedule is that your team doesn't have to play the Yankees and Red Sox 38 times a year the way the Orioles do. Though I think we've consistently played the Red Sox very tough, and we split our September games 3-3 with the Yankees this year. Indeed, I'm going to go ahead and take credit for the Red Sox pennant, on the grounds that "Red Sox win game 7 because Kevin Brown was bad" and "Kevin Brown was bad because he broke his hand last month" and "Kevin Brown broke his hand last month because he was frustrated after getting knocked around by the Orioles." Though to be fair, one reason you like the unbalanced schedule is that your team doesn’t have to play the Yankees and Red Sox 38 times a year the way the Orioles do. Though I think we’ve consistently played the Red Sox very tough, and we split our September games 3-3 with the Yankees this year. Indeed, I’m going to go ahead and take credit for the Red Sox pennant, on the grounds that “Red Sox win game 7 because Kevin Brown was bad” and “Kevin Brown was bad because he broke his hand last month” and “Kevin Brown broke his hand last month because he was frustrated after getting knocked around by the Orioles.”

]]>