View Single Post
Old 10-04-2018, 11:22 PM
mzh mzh is offline
WSI Church Elder
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,443

Originally Posted by TDog View Post
Five teams in the American League lost at least 95 games, and they played really bad baseball in doing so. The A's didn't win 97 games because they played great baseball.

Inflated wins were out there this year for teams that didn't tank.
The wins totals may have been a little inflated, but that still doesn’t have to mean the A’s didn’t play great baseball, no? Plus the West was the only division that didn’t have any truly godawful teams in it. That bullpen is one of the most singularly dominant group of relievers I’ve ever seen. Chapman is an absolute wizard at third and can really swing it. Isn’t it fun watching a little guy like Khris Davis hit balls to the moon? Even that kid Laureano looks really exciting. Throw that in with a solid group of veterans like Lucroy, Lowrie, Semien, and Piscotty, and I think it’s hard to argue they didn’t earn those wins as much as any other team.

Besides, given the finite number of players in MLB at any given time, you could argue that talent level is a zero sum game. Just because the O’s, Royals, and White Sox fielded an unusually number of bad players doesn’t mean the Red Sox and Yankees and A’s won games they didn’t deserve to win, it just means they had an unusually high number of great players. I don’t think it’s really fair to call that watered down.
Reply With Quote