Why Is San Francisco In the Playoff Hunt???

Why are the San Francisco Giants even in the National League Wild Card race? Taking a quick glance over their team, I see nothing special besides OF Barry Bonds, and SP Jason Schmidt. Those two cannot be enough to carry a team as far as the Giants are, right?

To find out what was going on, I took a deeper look at each player on the Giant's statistics.

This really didn't help much at first. Here's what I am talking about:

**Players are listed by position. Whoever has the most plate appearances at a position is listed. Stat lines go as follows (AVG/OBP/SLG, VORP)**

Marquis Grissom CF: .273/.312/.440, 16.1 VORP
Barry Bonds LF: .362/.608/.802, 112.2 VORP
Edgardo Alfonzo 3B: .280/.344/.395, 13.2 VORP
Michael Tucker RF: .269/.363/.444, 21.1 VORP
Pedro Feliz 1B: .266/.293/.472(I didn't think his SLG was possible with his OBP), 14.9 VORP
A.J. Pierzynski C: .296/.339/.456, 23.1 VORP
Ray Durham 2B: .254/.333/.450, 19.8 VORP
Neifi Perez SS: .232/.269/.295, -10.1 VORP

***It is worth noting that J.T. Snow has less appearances at 1B than Feliz but is playing much better (.317/.419/.519, 34.3 VORP), and Deivi Crus has less appearances than Perez at shortstop and is playing much better (.313/.343/.462, 20.2 VORP). So feel free to plug these two players in at their respective positions.***

This offense does appear to be good, but not great. I don't see this offense helping them, or hurting them. But I was wrong--BIG TIME. I didn't see it at first, but when I looked at the total team stats, I saw how great this offense was. But, let's get back to the analysis.

Now, I'm forced to think that it must be their pitching that is carrying them. I was wrong again. Look for yourself:

**4 Starting pitchers are listed along with the top 7 relievers by Innings Pitched. Stat lines go like so- (ERA, K/BB, VORP, IP)**

Jason Schmidt SP: 2.52, 193/60, 59.2, 174.7
Kirk Reuter SP: 5.02, 44/52, 5.5, 148.7
Brett Tomko SP: 4.80, 66/49, 6.0, 146.3
Jerome Williams SP: 4.41, 77/43, 10.6, 122.3
Dustin Hermanson RP: 4.36, 82/38, 14.2, 115.7
Jim Brower RP: 3.77, 53/28, 8.5, 76.3
Matt Herges RP: 5.40, 35/16, -4.9, 58.3
Noah Lowry RP: 3.88, 48/17, 9.2, 53.3
Wayne Franklin RP: 6.70, 36/21, -5.8, 44.3
Scott Erye RP: 4.26, 31/20, 5.2, 38.0
Jason Christiansen RP: 3.86, 18/21, 4.3, 30.3

You've got to be kidding me! Their pitching is not good at all. And put that on top of what I thought to be an average offense, and it makes absolutely no sense that they are in the Wild Card race.

At this point in my analysis, I decided to look at their team pitching stats to see how they ranked against other NL playoff-chasing teams.

I looked at team K/BB ratios, team K/IP ratios, and team ERA.

Please note that the team stats below will not be equal to total of the statistics of the players listed earlier because only the most used players were use in the earlier list, and the stats below take every player on the team's stats no matter how little used.

Here are those lists:

K/BB
1. Houston: 1013/412 = 2.46

2. San Diego: 816/334 = 2.44

3. Chicago: 1032/434 = 2.38

4. St. Louis: 799/351 = 2.27

5. Florida: 883/408 = 2.16

6. Philadelphia: 837/394 = 2.12

7. Los Angeles: 814/394 =2.07

8. Atlanta: 808/422 = 1.91

9. San Francisco: 791/435 = 1.81

K/IP

1.Chicago: 1032/1137.1 = .91

2. Houston: 1013/1133.0 = .89

3. Florida: 883/1113.0 = .79

4. Philadelphia: 837/1141.2 =.73

5. San Diego: 816/1136.0 =.72(tie)

5. Atlanta: 808/1125.2 = .72(tie)

7. Los Angeles: 814/1138.1 = .71

8. St. Louis: 799/1144.2 = .70

9. San Francisco: 791/1165.0 = .68

ERA

1. Atlanta: 3.70

2. Chicago: 3.71

3. St. Louis: 3.76

4. Los Angeles: 3.83

5. San Diego: 3.88

6. Florida: 4.02

7. Houston: 4.14

8. San Francisco: 4.43

9. Philadelphia: 4.68

These lists show exactly what I thought in the first place. The Giant's pitching stinks. (Last place on two lists, and second-to-last on the other)

Now back to that thing that I said I didn't see at first, that I was wrong about--BIG TIME. I didn't see how great, spectacular, phenomenal, excellent, and outrageously supreme they are at getting on base.

For the following list, I am not going to use just playoff-chasing teams, I'm going to use the top ten NL teams in OBP, just to show how awesome the Giants are at getting on base.

Look at this unbelieveable list:

OBP

1. San Francisco: .357

2. Colorado: .347

3. St. Louis: .344

4. Philadelphia: .342

5. San Diego: .341

6. Atlanta: .340

7. Houston: .340

8. Los Angeles: .337

9. Cincinatti: .333

10. Florida: .330

10 POINTS HIGHER THAN THEIR CLOSEST COMPETITOR!!!! That is how they are in this playoff race.

I did not see this with my first look at all their player's individual numbers. I was blind.

Getting on base wins baseball games, and that is exactly what the Giant's are doing.

But I do not believe they will make the playoffs, because, in addition to getting on base, you also have to keep your opponents off the bases to win. And as shown earlier, the Giants are not good at that.

The question has been answered swiftly and precisely. "How are the Giants in the NL Wild Card race?" "They are getting on base more than anybody else--by ALOT."

Frank Bundy III

Please email me at frnkbndy@yahoo.com with any questions, concerns, suggestions, or comments.

I Hope Ben Sheets Doesn't Know Where I Live

I think I may have cursed Ben Sheets. Since the day I wrote my article about Sheets being better than Jason Schmidt of the San Francisco Giants (which I later found out was not true, BUT BARELY), Sheets has had three below average starts.

The article "Sheets or Schmidt?" was written and posted on August 11, 2004, since then Sheets has started on August 12 against Atlanta, then August 18, and 23rd against the Cubs. Here are his pitching lines in those three starts:

August 12(Braves): 8.0 IP, 7 Hits, 4 ER, 3 HR, 2 BB, 13 K
August 18(Cubs): 7.0 IP, 9 Hits, 5 ER, 1 HR, 0 BB, 8 K
August 23(Cubs): 6.0 IP, 10 Hits, 6 ER, 0 HR, 1 BB, 5 K

TOTAL: 21.0 IP, 26 Hits, 15 ER, 4 HR, 3 BB, 26 K (ERA = 6.42)

At the time of my article Ben Sheets numbers were as follows:

156.0 IP, 130 Hits, 16 HR, 171/21 K/BB, 2.56 ERA, 44.2 VORP

His numbers now stand at:

177.0 IP, 156 Hits, 20 HR, 197/24 K/BB, 3.10 ERA, 43.9 VORP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Although these have been three bad starts, the good sign is that Sheets is still having no trouble striking batters out, and is also not walking them. He is just giving up to0 many hits(Hits/IP = 1.24). Which is not good....but not nearly as bad as for instance, walking a batter an inning with the same amount of strikeouts as he has.

Take a look at his K/BB in those three starts, they are a mind-boggling 26/3(8.67 K's for every BB).

So while his ERA, HR's allowed and Hits per inning(26/21) have risen badly in these last three starts. I do not see this as a late season collapse by Sheets.

Please note how Sheet's VORP has only dropped 0.3 runs. This is a clear example of why VORP is the best statistic for measuring a player's performance.

This rise in ERA, Hits allowed, and HR allowed show a big drop-off in performance; but when you look at the K/BB ratio, it is clear that he is just running in to some bad luck(possibly caused by me).

Looking at his VORP, which put all statistics into account, you can easily see that, in reality, he has not had that bad of a drop-off.

The amount of hits he has given up in those starts do not in any way coincide with his strikeout numbers.

A pitcher striking out almost nine times as many hitters as he walks, and also striking out more than a batter an inning(26 K's in 21 IP), is doing just fine, and good numbers will follow.

So even though I have cursed Sheets with apparent bad luck, I believe he will bounce back and finish strong.

Frank Bundy III

Please email me at frnkbndy@yahoo.com, with any comments, concerns, questions, or suggestions.

2004 Braves vs. 2003 Braves

Last year the Braves were an offensive juggernaut, with good starting pitching, and a below average bullpen. They won 101 games. They were awesome, and that is a fact, not an opinion.

But this year, after losing multiple great players, they are in first place again, with 69 wins, and are still dominating their opponents in the NL East. How can this be?

Let's compare this year's team with last year's. I will compare each offensive players hitting line(AVG/OBP/SLG) and VORP this year, with those same stats last year. And I will compare each pitcher's ERA and VORP from this year to last year's.

This will be sorted by position.

Offensive Players

2004 CF - Andruw Jones - .269/.358/.505-- 33.4 VORP
2003 CF - Andruw Jones - .277/.338/.513-- 46.3 VORP

2004 RF- J.D. Drew - .298/.414/.575-- 55.0 VORP
2003 RF - Gary Sheffield - .330/.419/.604-- 87.4 VORP

2004 SS - Rafael Furcal - .285/.353/.435-- 32.4 VORP
2003 SS - Rafael Furcal - .292/.350/.443-- 57.6 VORP

2004 3B - Chipper Jones - .241/.348/.476-- 19.2 VORP
2003 3B - Vinny Castilla - .277/.310/.461-- 14.3 VORP

2004 C - Johnny Estrada - .330/.387/.491-- 38.9 VORP
2003 C - Javy Lopez - .327/.378/.687-- 78.1 VORP

2004 2B - Marcus Giles - .300/.375/.423-- 19.5 VORP
2003 2B - Marcus Giles - .316/.384/.526-- 69.6 VORP

2004 LF(2 Players) - Eli Marrero - .327/.376/.556-- 19.0 VORP
--------------------- Charles Thomas - .304/.345/.452--5.9 VORP
----------------------Combined VORP-- 24.9
2003 LF - Chipper Jones - .305/.402/.517-- 54.9 VORP

2004 1B(2 Players) - Julio Franco - .283/.356/.422-- 12.5 VORP
--------------------- Adam LaRoche - .253/.310/.428-- 5.3 VORP
---------------------Combined VORP-- 17.8
2003 1B(2 Players) - Julio Franco - .294/.372/.452-- 13.3 VORP
--------------------- Robert Fick - .268/.335/.418-- 14.3 VORP
---------------------Combined VORP-- 27.6

2004 Offensive Players Total VORP-241.1 (10 Players)
2003 Offensive Players Total VORP-450.6 (9 Players)


2004 Starting Pitchers
John Thomson - 4.49 ERA, 10.3 VORP
Russ Ortiz - 3.49 ERA, 38.1 VORP
Mike Hampton - 4.74 ERA - 11.6 VORP
Jaret Wright - 3.26 ERA, 27.5 VORP
Paul Byrd - 4.11 ERA, 8.1 VORP
2004 Starting Pitchers Total VORP-95.6

2003 Starting Pitchers
Greg Maddux - 3.96 ERA, 26.1 VORP
Russ Ortiz - 3.81 ERA, 33.3 VORP
Mike Hampton - 3.84 ERA, 29.2 VORP
Horacio Ramirez - 4.00 ERA, 24.3 VORP
Shane Reynolds - 5.43 ERA, 1.8 VORP
2003 Starting Pitchers Total VORP-114.7


Relief Pitchers (Top 6 Based on number of Innings Pitched)

2004 Relief Pitchers
Chris Reitsma - 3.64 ERA, 12.8 VORP
John Smoltz - 1.84 ERA, 27.4 VORP
Juan Cruz - 2.44 ERA, 16.8 VORP
Antonio Alfonseca - 3.06 ERA, 13.6 VORP
Travis Smith - 7.03 ERA, -3.4 VORP
Kevin Gryboski - 2.56 ERA, 7.5 VORP
2004 Relief Pitchers Total VORP-74.7

2003 Relief Pitchers
Trey Hodges - 4.66 ERA , 3.0 VORP
John Smoltz - 1.12 ERA, 31.1 VORP
Roberto Hernandez - 4.35 VORP, 1.4 VORP
Ray King - 3.51 ERA, 6.8 VORP
Jung Bong - 5.05 ERA, 3.6 VORP
Kevin Gryboski - 3.86 ERA, 5.7 VORP
2003 Relief Pitchers Total VORP-51.6

The only gain the Braves have over last year is in their bullpen. Their starting pitching is worse, and their offense now is like a little league offense compared to last year.

It does not take a genius to figure out that the Braves were much better last year, anybody could figure that out without the stats. But the harder thing to figure is, why are they still a good team at 69-53, 7.5 games ahead of the Marlins for first place in the NL East.

The only way the Braves can still be a good team this year is simply their bullpen. While last year, the Braves were putting up so many runs offensively, their below-average bullpen did not hurt them, this year their offense isn't nearly as good, but when they do have leads they have a bullpen to protect it. I think that if last years bullpen were on this years team, the Braves would be much worse.

The bullpen is the biggest reason, but also, their starting pitching this year, although not as good as last year, is good enough to keep them in games, and also win a few.

And lastly, even though this offense is terrible compared to last year's, one should think about how bad it could have been after the losses of Lopez, and Sheffield. When you think about that, this offense is performing extremely well. And you can credit that to Johnny Estrada, J.D. Drew and Eli Marrero.

Just goes to show how important a bullpen is to the success of a baseball team.

Credit the whole Braves organization for continuing a 10 year run of success, even when times looked grim.

Frank Bundy III

Who are the AL Playoff teams?

Who are the four best teams in the American League in 2004? You know, the ones that should make the playoffs? This is a question that I will not leave unanswered.

So to begin, let's look at the eight teams in the AL vying for four playoff spots: Boston, New York, Texas, Anaheim, Oakland, Cleveland, Minnesota, and Chicago.

To figure out which four of these teams were the best, I performed a statistical analysis on each teams, then ranked them.

I took each offensive and pitching category that I believe have the MOST to do with winning and losing, and ranked each teams output in that statistical categories, against the others.

Those of you who play fantasy sports know this concept very well, it is how most leagues do their standings.

Since each team was ranked 1-8(because of eight teams), they were then given an amount of points equal to that ranking. Which was then added up against all their other "ranking points" in the other statistics, to come up with a final "Ranking Point."

Keep in mind, that since getting ranked first(resulting in one "ranking point") is better than getting ranked eighth(resulting in 8 "ranking points"), the team with the LOWEST amount of "ranking points" would therefore be the best.

Now before I show the hard numbers, let me tell which statistics I used in the analysis.

For offensive statistics, the following was used:

Average(AVG), On-Base Percentage(OBP), Slugging Percentage(SLG), K/BB ratio quotient(K/BB), Home Runs(HR), and Runs(R).

I believe these numbers have the most to do with scoring runs, which IS the ultimate goal in baseball.

***I tried to figure out a way to use Stolen Bases, and Caught Stealing numbers, but every time I tried, the numbers always gave an advantage, and therefore higher ranking to the team that attempting less stolen bases. So these were left out.****


Then, for the pitching statistics, the following were used:

Earned Run Average(ERA), K/BB ratio quotient(K/BB), K/IP ratio quotient(K/IP), Walks + Hits/Innings Pitched(WHIP), Home Runs Allowed(HR), Opponents On-Base Percentage(OBP), and Opponents Slugging Percentage(SLG).

I believe these number have the most to do with keeping men off base, and therefore, the most to do with preventing runs, which IS the ultimatle goal of pitching.

Enough with the explanation, lets see the numbers.

**Note: In the K/BB column you will see a decimal point number (ex. 2.66). This is that teams total number of strikeouts divided by the total number of base on balls that pitching staff has accumulated. So in the end the number you see is how many batters that team strikes out for every one walk they issue. So, obviously, the higher the number the better**

**Note #2: In the K/IP column you will see a decimal point number (ex. .747). This is that pitching staff's total number of strikeouts divided by the total number of innings pitched. So in the end the number you see is how many batters that team strikes out per inning. So, obviously, the higher the number the better**

Pitching Statistics

Team----------ERA----K/BB----K/IP-----WHIP-----HR----OBP------SLG==PTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minnesota---4.04(1)--2.66(1)--.747(4)--1.32(2)--127(3)--.324(3)--.409(3)==17

Oakland-----4.05(2)--1.89(6.5)-.707(5)-1.37(4)--122(2)--.333(5)--.407(1.5)=26

Boston-------4.17(3)--2.49(2)--.776(2)--1.31(1)--111(1)--.321(1)---.407(1.5)=11.5

Anaheim-----4.39(4)--2.23(4)--.788(1)--1.38(5)--137(5)-.330(4)---.425(4)==27

Texas-------4.46(5)--1.70(8)---.647(8)--1.44(7)--133(4)-.343(7)---.429(5)==44

New York---4.50(6)--2.46(3)---.702(6)--1.34(3)--138(6)-.322(2)---.431(6)==32

Chicago-----4.67(7)---1.94(5)---.682(7)--1.39(6)--151(8)-.335(6)---.441(7)==46

Cleveland---4.88(8)---1.89(6.5)-.749(3)-1.48(8)--146(7)-.346(8)--.446(8)=48.5

In these pitching rankings, it is very easy to see that Boston has the best pitching, while Cleveland has the worst.

Now, we take a look at the offensive rankings:

**Note: In the K/BB column you will see a decimal point number (ex. 1.97). This is that teams total number of strikeouts divided by the total number of base on balls their hitter have accumulated. So in the end the number you see is how many times that team strikes out for every one base on balls they draw. So, obviously, the lower the number the better.**

Offensive Statistics

Team----------AVG-------OBP-------SLG--------K/BB-------HR-----R=======PTS

Minnesota--.261(8)----.327(8)----.421(8)-----1.97(6)-----134(7)-----547(8)====45

Oakland----.272(4)----.344(4)----.435(6)-----1.79(3)-----142(5)------599(6)====28

Boston------.281(2.5)--.360(1)----.469(1)-----1.81(4)-----161(4)-------671(1)===13.5

Anaheim----.283(1)----.340(5)---.424(7)------2.17(7)-----110(8)-----595(7)====35

Texas-------.267(6)----.331(7)----.464(2)-----2.23(8)----175(2.5)-----634(4)===29.5

New York---.266(7)---.353(3)----.460(3.5)----1.43(1)-----182(1)-----652(3)===18.5

Chicago-----.268(5)--- .335(6)----.460(3.5)----1.95(5)----175(2.5)--619(5)===27

Cleveland---.281(2.5)--.357(2)----.447(5)------1.61(2)----135(6)---669(2)===19.5

In these offensive rankings, it is very easy to see that Boston has the best hitting, while Minnesota has the worst.

Now, the teams final "ranking points" for both pitching and offense are added together to give us a final "ranking point." This finally will tell us who the top four teams in the AL are.

**Remember...The LOWER the total, the better**

Total Ranking Points

1. Boston----13.5 Offense+11.5 Pitching=25

2. New York---18.5 Offense+32 Pitching=50.5

3. Oakland---28 Offense+26 Pitching=54

4. Minnesota--45 Offense+17 Pitching=62(tie)

4. Anaheim--35 Offense+27 Pitching=62(tie)

6. Cleveland--19.5 Offense+48.5 Pitching=68

7. Chicago--27 Offense+46 Pitching=73

8. Texas--29.5 Offense+44 Pitching=73.5

It is very easy to see who the best team is.

I believe the most remarkable part of this analysis is the definitive proof that the best team in the AL, by far, is Boston. They have half the "ranking points" of the next best team's .....HALF!!!! That means, according to this analysis, they are twice as good.

Does this mean there really is a curse in Beantown? I mean, how can a team be so far, head and shoulders, above the rest of the competition, and only manage to be currently tied for the wild card with the worst team of the eight, Texas? The Curse lives.

Who knows, maybe these numbers will work out in the end of the season, and Boston will win the AL. But for now, they aren't even in the AL East race, they are being beat, badly, by a team that statistically, they are twice as good as.

Another thing to see in this analysis is that Anaheim is tied with Minnesota for fourth place. But because of the division layout in the AL, they have to compete against Oakland, leaving Minnesota a division title, and leaving them as the most unlucky team of the bunch.

In the end, the best four teams according to this analysis(minus Anaheim) are, as of right now, the ones that look like they are going to make the playoffs. And this analysis shows why.

Endnote:

If you looked at my profile, you already know that I am a very big Boston Redsox fan, and you may think that I performed this analysis to show that my team is the best. I want to assure you that this is not true. While I did know that Boston was the best team in the AL, I did not realize by how much they were the best. I did this analysis strictly to see if the four statistically best teams, were the one who had the best shot at making the playoffs.

Frank Bundy III

Not Sheets...Yes Schmidt

This will be a very short article.

For my article "Sheets or Schmidt" I conducted research on every team that both Jason Schmidt and Ben Sheets has faced this year, and found out their total numbers. After conducting that research, I had found out that Ben Sheets and Jason Schmidt had faced pretty even competition-BY TEAM.

Well, I have now figured out an easier way to see what kind of competition each pitcher has faced. And that is to look at the "Quality of Batter Faced" report on www.baseballprospectus.com, in the statistics sections.

This section in Baseball Prospectus shows how tough the competition is for every pitcher based on each and every batter he has faced--more accurate than the team competition I used in my comparison.

After feeling stupid for conducting all that reseach, and punching in all those numbers, I just looked at those reports on Baseball Prospectus and saw that batters that have faced Schmidt this year are putting up a .260/.330/.418 line, while batters that have faced Sheets have put up a .254/.321/.411 line.

There you have it.

In my original article I had the competition being equal based on each teams total stats, and I was right, those numbers I used are real and factual. And since they were equa,l I gave the nod to Sheets based on both pitcher's home ball park ratings(Miller park being neutral, and SBC Park being a severe pitchers park).

But since Baseball Prospectus goes even deeper to find out the quality of competition faced by a pitcher, It is clear that Schmidt has faced the tougher competition of the two.

Even so, I guess a case could be made that even though Schmidt is facing tougher batters, he has a better chance of getting them out than Sheets does, because of the tremendously large ballpark he pitches in.

But the fact is, he is facing tougher hitters, while putting up the same phenomenal numbers as Sheets.

So the final question is: "Does a ballpark have a greater effect on hitting, than the actual ability of the hitter?"

I believe the answer to this question is no. Although the answer is closer than some may think, I can only take so much away from a pitcher based on his park; but not enough to cancel out the competition he is facing.

So finally, after 3 articles, a wrong calculation, alot of unnecessary number crunching, and a different answer, I can finally say that, by a slight margin, Jason Schimdt has pitched better than Ben Sheets this year.

Frank Bundy III

More Reasons why Cleveland isn't in First

As I was looking through my own website, after seeing Cleveland dismantle the Twins tonight 8-2, I took a second look at my article "Why isn't Cleveland in First?" After re-reading the article, where I decided to only use offensive production and starting pitching for comparison, I decided I would continue this article with a bullpen comparison.

I'm sorry Cleveland fans, I know that you already know that this is where Minnesota will just rocket past you, but I have to do this analysis.

I compared the numbers (VORP, K/BB ratio, ERA, IP) of each teams top three relievers by innings pitched, and then each of their respective "closers."

***Since Cleveland used 3 or 4 closers in the first half, I just used the top four relievers by innings for them. I did not use Bob Wickman since he just came back of the disabled list. But the good thing for Cleveland fans, Jose Jiminez will not be in this comparison, due to lack of innings.***

Here are each teams top 4 relievers and their numbers(ranked by VORP):

Cleveland:
1. David Riske- 11.6 VORP, 58/30 K:BB, 4.34 ERA, 58.0 IP
2. Rick White- 9.8 VORP, 33/21 K:BB, 3.77 ERA, 59.7 IP
3. Rafael Betancourt- 7.7 VORP, 52/12 K:BB, 4.20 ERA, 49.3 IP
4. Kazuhito Tadano- 1.8 VORP, 36/16 K:BB, 4.95 ERA, 43.7 IP

Minnesota:
1. Joe Nathan- 31.0 VORP, 64/18 K:BB, 0.85 ERA, 52.7 IP
2. Juan Rincon- 20.5 VORP, 74/21 K:BB, 2.58 ERA, 59.3 IP
3. Joe Roa- 12.1 VORP, 34/14 K:BB, 3.64 ERA, 34.3 IP
4. Terry Mulholland- 4.7 VORP, 34/19 K:BB, 5.14 ERA, 70.0 IP

One can see who has the better bullpen.

And since K:BB was the deciding factor in our first comparison of Cleveland and Minnesota, we will look at those ratios in this comparison also.

The total K:BB and K:IP ratios for each team are as follows:

Cleveland: 179/79 K:BB, 179/213.4 K:IP

Minnesota: 206/72 K:BB, 206/236.3 K:IP

Minnesota definitely strikes out more and walks less-AGAIN.

What one must remember though, is that since a bullpen, in general, will pitch less than a starting staff, the difference in numbers between two bullpens will be smaller, but will actually mean just as much in showing differences as the large gaps produced by the more quantitative starting pitching numbers.

So, even though the differences between the two bullpens do not look so bad, they clearly show a distinct difference in the two.

Even though this does give validation to the fact that Minnesota's bullpen is superior, I will give more numbers to prove the fact.
***********************************************************************************
I am doing this because, to the naked eye, they above stats could actually look similar.(**READ: "What one must remember...." paragraph)
***********************************************************************************
To delve a little bit deeper, I decided to display how many Hits and Home Runs each bullpen has allowed.

Using the 4 pitchers named above, here are those numbers:

Cleveland:221 Hits, 28 HR allowed in 213.4 IP (1.0356 H/IP, 0.131 HR/IP)

Minnesota: 226 Hits, 22 HR allowed in 236.3 IP (0.9564 H/IP, 0.093 HR/IP)

Minnesota allows less that a hit an inning, while Cleveland allows more than one. And on top of that, Cleveland has allowed 6 more HR. And in the late innings folks, that just doesn't cut it.

But again, these numbers DO look kind of close, so remember that a bullpen pitches less total innings than a starting staff, therefore creating smaller (but just as relevant!!) gaps between two bullpen's numbers.

So, even though it has already been made clear why Minnesota is in first place in my previous article "Why isn't Cleveland in First?", this bullpen analysis just widens the gap between the two teams a little more.

But, like I stated at the beginning of the article, Cleveland beat Minnesota 8-2 tonight, decreasing the gap between the two to 2 games. And there are two games left in that series.

Cleveland might overcome those bad first half numbers, and Minnesota's lack of offense might just catch up to them. Who knows?
&%Good luck Cleveland&%

But for now, my advice to Cleveland fans involved in an argument, "Compare your offense to other teams, you'll usually win that one."

Frank E. Bundy III

Correction on "Sheets or Schmidt?"

For those of you that read my "Sheets or Schmidt?" article, I apologize for an error that I made in my calculations.

The end result of the article--that Sheets is pitching better--remains the same. But now, post-error, he is pitching only a little bit better, because of his ballpark, not because of his ballpark and competition faced.

With the old calculations, Sheets competition had a OBP that was .048 higher than Schmidt's--which would make his competition much better. But it turns out that my error, completely skewed those results and made the competition only seem to be unbalanced. When actually, after the correction, the competition faced was very similar.

I am sorry for this error, but now it is corrected, and the old article with the old numbers no longer exists. The article you currently see entitled "Sheets or Schmidt?" is 100% correct, and error-free.

Sheets or Schmidt??

It seems like all I hear about is how great Jason Schmidt is pitching for the San Francisco Giants; and how he is the leader in the Cy Young race. Well, while there is no doubt that he is pitching fantastic, there is another pitcher putting up similar, if not better, statistics. He plays for the Milwaukee Brewers and goes by the name of Ben Sheets.

Before we get started lets just look at the numbers of each pitcher:

Ben Sheets: 44.2 VORP, 171/21 K:BB, 16 HR, 130 Hits, 156.0 IP, and 2.56 ERA

Jason Schmidt: 49.3 VORP, 175/57 K/BB, 13 HR, 110 Hits, 157.2 IP, and 2.74 ERA

You can see right off the bat that these numbers are very similar, except the Sheets gives up a little more hits, while Schmidt walks more batters.

But for arguments sake, let consider these numbers equal, since they're pretty darn close.

So, to actually find out who is pitching better this season, we have to see who is facing better competition. And, as you knew I would, I've already figured out the hitting statistics of all the teams these pitchers faced.

The final numbers on these two pitchers competition look like this:

Sheets Competition: .265 AVG/.329 OBP/.426 SLG

Schmidt Competition: .266 AVG/.335 OBP/.429 SLB

***You can see the offensive statistics of each team Sheets and Schmidt faced at www.mlb.com. ***

It is not hard to see that both pitchers have faced very similar competition. Except, that Schmidt's competition has a slightly better OBP. But again, for arguments sake, we will consider the competition equal.

So after looking at those numbers, we have no definitive answer as to who is pitching better, but we can look even deeper. Read on...

Of Sheet's 23 starts, 14 have been at his home ballpark- Miller Park, while out of Schmidt's 22 starts, he also has 14 home starts at SBC Park.

These number are significant because according to Baseball Prospectus's 2004 park ratings, Miller Park is a nuetral park--fair to both hitters and pitchers,--while SBC Park is rated as a severe pitchers park-a favorable advantage to pitchers.

Not only is Sheets putting up equivlant numbers to Schmidt's against equal competition; he is doing it in a park where hitters are at equal advantage to him. While Schmidt is pitching in a park where the advantage is shifted in his favor.

So, now because of the home ballpark factor, which IS a big factor-and let nobody tell you different-we have Sheets being the better pitcher, but just slightly.

So now the question stands, Should Schmidt beat out Sheets in the Cy Young race because his team has a better record(subsequently giving him a better record).

Well, the answer to this question is no, IT SHOULDN'T help Schmidt out, but the fact is, that it does. For some reason, the statistic wins is looked upon as having a significant value.

This is not a new argument folks, it is one that has gone on for years. And the truth is, if both Sheets and Schmidt continued to pitch like they have for the rest of the year, with Sheets pitching better because of ballpark factor, Schmidt would win the Cy Young race.

Why???? Because he could have 20 wins by season's end, and Sheets would at most have 14 or 15.

Is this fair to Sheets, no. But IT IS the way it works out.

This article is only to show that, by the numbers, Sheets is pitching slightly better than Schmidt this year. I do not intend to downplay anything Schmidt has done this year. There is no doubt that Schmidt is pitching phenomenal, and is very deserving of the Cy Young thus far, just not as much as Sheets.

Frank E. Bundy III

Why isn't Cleveland in First??

For a while now, I've been asking myself, why aren't the Cleveland Indians leading the AL Central? They seem to me to have a better team than the Minnesota Twins.

So, after wondering why for so long, I decided I needed an answer. So, naturally, I went to the numbers to find it.

I started researching every Twins and Indian player's VORP, hitting line(AVG/OBP/SLG), and K/BB ratio. Then, of course I compared them.

Now before I just lay out these numbers, I want to explain how I used them.

I took the teams best player at each position, and used their numbers to represent each team's starter. So, each team has nine players in their comparison.

***Note: In some cases, I had to use players that have since been traded, because I am trying to figure out why the Indians aren't in first place NOW. And in order to do that I have to look at what each player did UNTIL NOW for their team. ***

So, after compiling all these numbers, I decided stack the nine starter's for each team next to eachother, in order, by VORP. And here are those lists:

Cleveland-------------------- Minnesota
1. Travis Hafner- 57.4--------1. Lew Ford- 30.4
2. Victor Martinez-39.7-----2. Torii Hunter- 19.0
3. Ronnie Belliard- 33.0-----3. Shannon Stewart- 14.7
4. Omar Vizquel- 29.1------4. Corey Koskie- 14.0
5. Matt Lawton- 25.4-------5. Christian Guzman- 11.8
6. Casey Blake- 24.2--------6. Jacque Jones- 6.4
7. Ben Broussard- 18.8------7. Luis Rivas- 5.2
8. Jody Gerut- 12.3----------8. Doug Mientkiewicz-3.0
9. Coco Crisp- 9.3-----------9. Henry Blanco- -5.0


Please tell me that I am not the only one who sees how much better Cleveland's offense is than Minnesota's. Actually, when you look at these charts, the only conclusion that can be made is that Minnesota's offense is a joke. Their second best player only has a 19.0 VORP!!!!

Also notice that Cleveland's lineup is actually producing a positive VORP at the bottom of the list. Cleveland's offense is far and away the better of the two.

So now I must look at pitching. With pitching I did the same thing I did with position players, but for the top 4 pitchers on each team(by Innings Pitched). I looked at all of the player's VORP, ERA, and K/BB ratio.

Again I compiled a chart of each teams four pitchers by VORP. This chart is displayed below:

Cleveland---------------------Minnesota
1. Jake Westbrook- 33.1------1. Johan Santana- 45.6
2. C.C. Sabathia- 28.6--------2. Brad Radke- 34.4
3. Cliff Lee- 15.8--------------3. Carlos Silva- 25.2
4. Jason Davis- -4.1----------4. Kyle Lohse- 5.8

OK, so here we see where Minnesota differentiates, and is better than Cleveland. Minnesota's top 3 starters, each are better than Cleveland's top 3. And, Minnesota is actually getting a positive VORP out of it's number 4 starter, as opposed to Cleveland's negative output.

So now, after breaking down all of these player's numbers, I ask- Is the difference between Cleveland's amazing offense and decent starting pitching, greater than the difference between Minnesota's horrific offense and phenomenal starting pitching.

Well, I tried answering this question by taking both Cleveland and Minnesota's total offensive VORP, and total pitching VORP, and subracting the two.

Well as it turns out, this question cannot be answered. Even though Cleveland's total offensive VORP of 250.2 minus their pitching VORP of 73.4 came out to be 176.8, and Minnesota's offensive VORP(hahahah) of 99.5, minus their pitching VORP of 111.0 came out to be -11.5, these numbers cannot be compared.

These differences only show that Minnesota's pitching is 11.5 runs better than their offense, while Cleveland offense is 176.8 runs better than their pitching.

I found that trying to compare these differences, is like comparing apples and oranges, it can't be done. Pitching and offense are two completely different categories(obviously). Those differences are just there to show you how each teams pitching and offense stack up to eachother. But I do this for argument's sake.

****Keep in mind that only 4 players contribute to each teams pitching VORP, while 9 players contribute to each teams offensive VORP, creating a huge difference in Cleveland's comparison numbers. This "number of players" concept, acutally makes Minnesotas offense more laughable. They have a greater total VORP produced by 4 pitchers, than their 9 offensive players!!!! ****


Now looking at all of these numbers, I still think Cleveland should be ahead in the standings. But they are not, and there has to be a reason.

To find this out I decided to look at each teams offensive K/BB ratios, and pitching K/BB ratios, to figure out how often they are: A. Keeping batters offbase, and B. Getting on base.

After looking at all of Cleveland and Minnesota's ratios, they came out looking like this:

Cleveland
Offensive K/BB: 535/355 (Crisp- 43/20, Lawton- 70/42, Belliard- 70/47, Vizquel- 46/40, Blake- 91/46, Gerut- 45/40, Martinez- 46/39, Hafner- 73/44, Broussard- 51/37)

Pitching K/BB: 342/191 (Westbrook- 76/42, Sabathia-99/48, Lee- 105/56, Davis- 62/45)

Minnesota
Offensive K/BB: 435/238 (Ford- 50/40, Guzman- 42/16, Jones- 77/27, Hunter- 66/24, Koskie- 72/38, Rivas- 38/10, Stewart- 24/30, Blanco- 37/14, Mientkiewicz- 38/39)

Pitcing K/BB: 399/128 (Santana- 173/41, Radke- 104/14, Silva- 53/23, Lohse- 69/50)


And there's your answer folks. Yes, Cleveland is walking more, but they have also struck out 117 more times than Minnesota. Therefore, not even putting the ball in play to have a chance at getting on base.

And the biggest factor in Minnesota being atop the division- They've struck out 57 more batters, and walked 63 less, therefore putting way less people on base than Cleveland.

So, as the old adage say, pitching wins baseball, not offense.

This comparison just goes to show that keeping batters off off base is what wins baseball games, and the best way to do that is to strike out batters, and not walk them. Which is what Minnesota is so good at doing, that it can overcome is extremely horrible offense.

Frank E. Bundy III

Further On VORP

If you read, "No Randy...No Problem," and you understand what VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) is--it is clearly defined in the article--but do not know how it is calculated, and subsequently would like to know; well I wish I could give you an answer.

What I do know is that it is calculated by using all of one players numbers, such as AVG, OBP, SLG, SB, CS, etc....and comparing it to the league average player numbers.

All of these numbers--the league averages, and player VORP-- are posted at baseballprospectus.com, in the statistics section.

If you were at all confused by the concept of VORP, please visit Baseball Prosepectus using the link above.

Frank E. Bundy III

No Randy...No Problem

I'm sure Paul DePodesta, General Manager of the LA Dodgers, planned on trading newly acquired pitcher Brad Penny, and 1B Hee Seop Choi (both from the Florida Marlins), to Arizona for Steve Finley and The Big Unit-Randy Johnson. But things didn't quite work out that way; they only got Steve Finley for 3 Minor Leaguers.

So on the surface, it appears the Dodgers were losers in this two day trading flurry between them, Arizona and Florida. But once you take a closer look at the numbers, you see that the Dodgers turned out to be the winners.

First off lets review the trade and what players were exchanged. First the Dodgers gave the Florida Marlins 32 year old catcher Paul LoDuca, 28 year old OF Juan Encarnacion, and 30 year old RP Guillermo Mota, in exchange for 26 year old SP Brad Penny, 25 year old 1B Hee Seop Choi, and minor league pitcher Billy Murphy.

Then the next day the Dodgers traded Murphy, along with 25 year old minor league catcher Koyie Hill, and 23 year old minor league OF Reggie Abercrombie, to the Diamondbacks for 39 year old OF Steve Finley, and 36 year old catcher Brent Mayne.

The deals Breakdown as follows:

Dodgers Receive
P- B. Penny
1B- H. Choi
OF- S. Finley
C - B. Mayne

Marlins Receive
OF-J. Encarnacion
RP-G. Mota
C- P. LoDuca

Diamondbacks Receive
OF-R. Abercrombie
P-B. Murphy
C- K. Hill

So now we must analyze the numbers of the players exchanged, and the numbers of the players whom they are replacing, to see who came out ahead and by how much. The primary statistic I will be using to compare players is VORP-Value Over Replacement Player.

VORP is defined as: The number of runs contributed beyond what a replacement-lever player would contribute if given the same percentage of team plate appearances, at that players position.

A Replacement Player is defined as: A player who hits as far below the league positional average as the league backups do relative to the league average, who plays average defense for the position, and is a breakeven base-stealer and baserunner.


*****Stat lines next to hitters name are as follows: VORP, Avg/OBP/Slg, K/BB
Example Steve Finley (23.6, 275/333/490, 52/40) means Finley has a 23.6 VORP, a .275 Batting Average, a .333 On-Base Percentage, a .490 Slugging Percentage, and has struck out 52 time against 40 base on balls.*****

*****Stat lines next to a pitchers name are as follows: VORP, ERA, K:BB, IP.
Example Brad Penny (33.2, 3.15 ERA, 105 /39 K:BB, 131.3 IP) means Penny has a 33.2 VORP, a 3.15 ERA, has struck out 105 batters against walking 39, in 131.3 Innings pitched.*****


So lets begin. We'll start by looking at Finley replacing Encarnacion in the OF for the Dodgers. The Dodgers get Finley's numbers (23.6, 275/333/490, 52/40) to replace Encarnacion's absolutely horrible numbers of (-0.5, 235/289/417. 53/21). Finley is a huge upgrade. The Dodger gain 24.1 runs on this deal.

Next lets look at Encarnacion replacing Jeff Conine in Florida's OF. Actually, Conine will be moving to 1B to replace Choi, but anyway, we look at Encarnacion replacing Conine in the outfield. Encarnacion's numbers(-0.5, 235/289/417. 53/21), are replacing Conine's number of ( 8.7, 273/332/419, 50/31). Encarnacion is an outrageous downgrade. On this deal the Marlins lost 9.2 runs.

Now, since we just looked at Jeff Conine's numbers, let's have look at him replacing Hee Seop Choi at 1B for the Marlins. Choi's unbelievable numbers (27.9, 270/385/495, 79/53), are being replaced with Conine's ( 8.7, 273/332/419, 50/31). Losing Choi was a clear downgrade. Again the Marlins lose runs on this deal. This time the amount is 19.2 runs.

Next, let's stay with Choi, he should be replacing Shawn Green in LA at 1B. Subsequently moving Green back to his natural position of OF. Again we look at Choi's awesome numbers (27.9, 270/385/495, 79/53), and use that to replace Green's numbers (19.9, 264/343/435, 73/49), to get more runs added to the Dodger's lineup. Choi is a clear improvement. This time the Dodgers gained 8.0 runs.

Now we look at Shawn Green being able to move back to his natural position, OF. Here he replaces Jason Werth, as much as it hurts, and the Dodgers get another improvement. They replace Werth's numbers (10.1, 279/355/525, 39/14), with Green's (19.9, 264/343/435, 73/49), and they gain 9.8 runs on the deal. Another clear improvement.

Next, we go to Paul LoDuca, who was having a fabulous season for LA; and we discuss him replacing Mike Redmond out in Florida. This one isn't even close. LoDuca's numbers of (22.5, 301/349/444, 27/22) replace Redmond's riduculous numbers of (0.6, 245/302/332, 24/12). The Marlins finally gain runs. On this deal the Marlins gain 21.9 runs.

And since were discussing Paul LoDuca, lets look at who will be replacing him in LA. The new catcher in LA will be Brent Mayne (1.1, 255/333/340, 18/13). This is obviously a downgrade from LoDuca's numbers (22.5, 301/349/444, 27/22). On this deal, the Dodgers lose 21.4 runs.

Now let's get to the pitching. We'll first look at the Dodgers acquiring Brad Penny. With Penny now in town, the 34 year old Wilson Alvarez moves into the bullpen (subsequently to replace Mota). But anyways, Penny's phenomenal numbers (33.2 VORP, 3.15 ERA, 105/39 K:BB, 131.3 IP), replace Alvarez's impressive numbers(20.8 VORP, 3.38 ERA, 71/22 K:BB 85.3 IP) for another improvement going the Dodgers way. This replacement results in 12.4 runs for the Dodgers.

Now lets look at Alvarez replacing Guillermo Mota. This one is fairly close. Alvarez (20.8 VORP, 3.38 ERA, 71/22 K:BB 85.3 IP) replaces Mota's numbers of (24.4 VORP, 2.14 ERA, 52/27 K:BB, 63 IP) in the LA bullpen. This change only results in a loss of 3.6 runs for the Dodgers.

Now we have to wonder who will replace Brad Penny in the Florida rotation. Well, that question was answered by the Marlins, by acquiring 30 year old SP Ismail Valdez from the Padres. Let's look at Valdez's numbers (-2.8 VORP, 5.53 ERA, 37/31 K:BB, 114 IP), and use them to replace Penny's numbers (33.2 VORP, 3.15 ERA, 105/39 K:BB, 131.3 IP). This isn't even close folks, the Marlins lose 36 runs on this tremendous downgrade.

Now, the last piece of the puzzle, whom does Guillermo Mota replace in Florida. Well the answer to that--since he is a relief pitcher--is nobody. His numbers (24.4 VORP, 2.14 ERA, 52/27 K:BB, 63 IP) are just simply added to Florida's total. So, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the Marlins gained 24.4 runs on the deal. A great improvement to the Marlins bullpen.

All right, now we've looked at every player and his replacement, or who he is replacing. We can finally figure out who the winners were on this trade. Let's break it all down.

Los Angeles Dodgers

Replace J.Encarnacion With S. Finley = +24.1

Replace S. Green With H. Choi = +8.0

Replace J. Werth with S. Green = +9.8

Replace P. LoDuca with B. Mayne = -21.4

Replace W. Alvarez with B. Penny = +12.4

Replace G. Mota with W. Alvarez = -3.6

Total Runs Gained by Dodgers =29.3 runs

Florida Marlins

Replace J. Conine with J. Encarnacion = -9.2

Replace H. Choi with J. Conine = -19.2

Replace M. Redmond with P. LoDuca = +21.9

Replace B. Penny with I. Valdez = -36.0

Add G. Mota = +24.4

Total Runs gained by Marlins = -18.1 runs

There you have it. The Dodgers gained 29.3 runs, while the Marlins lost 18.1 runs.

So, now we can clearly see who made out on this trade. But we should also see that the Dodgers added a 26 year old pitcher, and a 25 year old 1B in this deal. Not only did Paul DePodesta improve his team in the short run, he improved the Dodgers for many years in the future. What a deal!!!

DePodesta did all this while the youngest player the Marlins received was Encarnacion(28). The Marlins not only worsened their team, they sacrificed their future by trading Penny(26) and Choi(25).

And by the way, I would bet my life savings that Mr. Depodesta had already thought of this scenario(not getting Randy Johnson). And that is why he made these trades.

I'm sorry to repeat myself, but what a deal.

Lastly, let's not forget the all important minor leaguers in this deal. P- Billy Murphy, now on the Diamondbacks is a good pitcher in the minors with a 113/59 K:BB, and a 4.08 ERA. Also C Koyie Hill, who I believe is going to get playing time with the Diamondbacks, has a minor league VORP of 13.1, and a .286 batting average. These are two good players that the Diamondbacks received. But OF Reggie Abercrombie on the other hand is not so good. He has posted a -9.8 minor league VORP, with a 173 batting average.

Now, as a final thought, I'd like to point out that the Marlins must know the same things I know, and must have had a reason to make this trade--although I can't see it. But I do not believe that general managers can lack this much education, even common sense. So maybe Penny and Choi were un-signable in the future, or something. At the moment I do not know the details of their contracts.

But unless that is the reason, sacrificing future talent, that is already performing prominently at the big league level, for upgrades in the bullpen and at catcher-whose upgrade isn't even as great as the loss of the young players current level of performance-boggles my mind, and it should yours.

Frank E. Bundy III

Welcome to Serious Baseball

Hey, my name is Frank Bundy, and I am a die-hard baseball fan. I play fantasy baseball, read about baseball, track baseball, score the games that I watch, and write about baseball.

Writing about baseball is what this site is going to be all about. I will post articles frequently, spanning all subjects of the baseball world, and you(the reader) can respond.

I just want to let everybody know, I am a sabermetrician, I use sabermetrics to follow baseball. You know AVG/OBP/SLG lines, K/BB ratios, stuff like that. Sabermetrics is how I form my opinions, and it will be the basis of my articles.

So anyways, to get this whole site started I have submitted my first article below. It is actually not a statistics article, it doesn't even deal with any baseball teams or players. It is an article to let you, the reader, know how i feel about baseball.

Feel free to comment on this article.

_________________________________________________________________

America’s Obsession
Frank E. Bundy III

It has long been regarded, since the beginning of the century, that America’s pastime was baseball. Baseball was loved, watched, and enjoyed by people all over America. Although America still enjoys baseball, in the last ten to fifteen years it has taken a backseat to America’s obsession. To quote Howie Long’s Hall Of Fame enshrinement speech, “In my opinion, baseball is America’s pastime. But football is America’s passion.” Why is this? Why is it that America, for so long a baseball-driven country, has made football its number one priority.

This question essentially has two answers. The first and foremost answer is that football is on an ‘only once a week’ schedule. Just think about all the hype surrounding every Sunday and Monday gridiron clash. Even in cities that are not home to an NFL team, the games are hyped, enjoyed, followed and obsessed over every Sunday and Monday. Imagine, even though impossible, if every baseball game throughout a season were analyzed, thought about, and hyped as much as every football game is on local and national radio and television shows-baseball still would not get as many viewers. Why? Because even the most dedicated baseball fan will not watch 162 games a season, they will not have the time. But even the most casual of football fans can set aside one day a week to watch his or her favorite team.

The second answer to the question is ‘a short schedule’. Imagine the Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees, Toronto Blue Jays, Tampa Bay Devil Rays, and Baltimore Orioles all have a 90-56 record with sixteen games to go, and that all of them have identical head-to-head, division, and intraleague records; every single game for the remainder of the season would be extremely important, and subsequently viewed and hyped more. This is how the football season starts. And this is exactly why it is viewed by more of the American public.


But, even if this imaginary baseball situation came true, the first game on the NFL schedule would get more viewers than the last, tie breaking, baseball game. Again, I ask why? The answer is simply ‘hype’. The amount of hype going into that last baseball game is nowhere near the amount of hype going into that first football game.

The two answers provided in this article have one common denominator, hype. Every football game is hyped to the maximum for six days before kickoff. Whereas in baseball, by the time last night’s game has been analyzed, it’s time for today’s game.

Football is great. But it is viewed more simply because of what I call the “too much time to analyze” theory. There is too much time to analyze, check that, overanalyze every game, and therefore, creating the overabundance of hype surrounding every NFL game.

So to all casual and die-hard baseball fans I challenge you to think of baseball on a once-a-week schedule, with only sixteen games each season. Every Saturday all thirty baseball teams would play their one game. Each team would have only one starting pitcher, and one backup. For example, every Saturday, the Cubs would start Mark Prior (just like any NFL team does with their starting quarterback). Now with this schedule in place, football and baseball are on a more even level. The amount of hype time would be equal, the amount of analysis would be equal, and most importantly, the amount of anticipation would be equal. If this were to happen, baseball would be America’s obsession.

Why would baseball beat out football every week? Because America still keeps baseball first, but just not for 162 games.

Also, another huge factor that works for football is America’s love for “flashes-in-the-pan." In football, if a team goes 10-6 and then runs the table in the playoffs as a wildcard team, they would finish 14-6. This, my friend, is a “flash-in-the-pan.” Only winning fourteen games to claim your league championship, come on!

In baseball, “flashes-in-the-pans” do not always win. The best team usually must win between 85 to 100 games and win three playoff series to be a champion. There is no “flashes-in-the-pan.”

In theory, every Super Bowl winner is to America what Vanilla Ice’s “Ice, Ice, Baby” was in the early nineties. While every World Series champion is to America what the entire Beatles catalog is still today; a love that stands the test of time, and has shown time and time again why it is loved.

Football is loved for exactly what football is; a weekly hype-a-thon that comes to a conclusion every Sunday.

All the things used to downplay football in this article, are exactly what makes football great-the once-a-week meetings, the short schedule, and the “flash-in-the-pan” winners.

Football is not America’s obsession just because America loves football. Football's popularity is nothing more than a byproduct of its shortened over-hyped and, overanalyzed schedule. America’s love is baseball; it always has and always will be. But America’s love for “flashes-in-the-pan,” and over-hyped games works for football, and against baseball.

___________________________________________________________________

If you read this article, thank you, and please post an opinion. Anyways, this is the first article I will write of many, so look forward to more.

Articles in the future will be more about statistics, players, and teams. But this article just gets it all started.

Frank Bundy III