The Projections System Got It All -- Right?!!

Remember this?



And this?

 
They were Baseball Prospectus's projected standings for 2016 last March. At the time, I made sport of the sabermetric community for continuing to expose themselves to ridicule. BP can no more predict next season's results than can any nominally educated fan .

Want proof? Look at that very first line. They have the 68-94 Tampa Bay Rays winning the East, while tabbing the Baltimore Orioles, a Wild Card entry, as the worst team in the AL. With projection systems like this, why not just throw darts, right?

But Wait, There's More...
Well, keep looking. BP pretty much nailed the rest of Baseball. Sure, the Rangers won the West, but there's lots of evidence that their level of play was much more like a lucky .500 team. The rest of the AL is dead on. As projected, the World Champion Royals did stumble. The Indians did indeed run away with the Central. The Angels, with Mike Trout and Albert Pujols, did in fact stink.

Take a gander at their NL projections. Nationals, Mets, Cubs, Dodgers and Giants in the playoffs. Spot on, but for the Nats and Mets switching places. The new and improved Dbacks? Correctly unimpressed. The 98-win Pirates? Stumbled even worse than projected. The Braves' tear down? BP nailed their record.

PECOTA's High BABIP
We could analyze what happened in the game that led to this unlikely result. The big spending teams in Chicago, Boston and Los Angeles delivered. The bad teams lived down to expectations. There's no evidence that the projection system, called PECOTA, learned any new tricks.

If you were projecting BP's projections for 2017, you would regress them to the mean and peg them for largely on target but for some big misses. But BP had a high BABIP last year and avoided the injury bug. They outplayed their third-order Pythagorean record.  I project that BP's 2017 projections -- and everyone else's -- will stumble about like Andy Capp, with some home runs and some big whiffs, no better than a semi-educated fan's best guesses. They won't nail all the playoff teams in either league, but they'll get the Cubs and Dodgers right, maybe the Astros too.

Next year this time, we can review my projection of BP's projection and determine who the bigger dope is. I'm betting that baseball's unpredictability vindicates me.

The "Stick a Knitting Needle in Your Eye" Bowl

For those still trapped in the argument that college football is about "student athletes" engaged in "amateur athletics" rather than a money grab by educational institutions, I present contrary evidence exhibit #736, today's Zaxby's Heart of Dallas Bowl.

Did you catch that irony? Zaxby's, purveyors of fried chicken, fried potatoes and 20-ounce cups of liquid sugar, is sponsoring a bowl game with the word "heart" in it. As in, you'll need a new one if we manage to convince you that our product constitutes a meal.

Meet the Mighty Contestants
That's a mere quibble to the two contestants, Army and the
University of North Texas, each of which will receive $1,100,000 for its trouble. For the Army, that will buy a wrench or two. North Texas, which won't have to pay for transportation or lodging to the Cotton Bowl stadium 43 miles away, pockets the cash and gets what amounts to another home game.

The game itself? Well, let's start by noting that Army is an independent Division 1 team that fattened up on Division 1A meatballs Lafayette and Morgan State in order to notch 7 wins in 12 games, and already prevailed in its rivalry game over Navy a couple of weeks ago. For the Black Knight players, this bowl has to constitute a massive letdown. But you follow orders when the people making the decisions will be your superiors for the rest of your college career and then for at least another four years after that.

UNT plays in a second-rate conference (Conference USA) where it went 3-5, en route to a 5-7 record overall, including beatdowns by mighty Western Kentucky (45-7) and Texas-El Paso (52-24).

A Showdown We've Been Waiting For -- Since October
If you think that a 5-7 team shouldn't be rewarded with a post-season berth, wait, the plot thickens. One of North Texas's victories this year came against ... this very same Army squad. Followers of these middling programs have already had their eyeballs scorched by this pathetic match-up back in late October. (After which UNT lost four of five contests before "earning" this bowl game, one of 40 being played by 80 Division 1 teams, 20 of which failed to win more games than they lost.)

So you can imagine the excitement, the build-up, the anticipation...that Zaxby's must feel for the advertising opportunities it will have when ESPN 23 presents the game at 11 a.m. Dallas time on the Tuesday after Christmas. Because, as you were saying, college sports are all about amateur athletes (who were done with their semester two weeks ago) and not college revenues.

Revisiting Jayson Stark and Captain Underpants

Back on the Ides of February I paid homage to the special talent of writer Jayson Stark, admired for excavating baseball's obscure and confounding in a whimsical way.

One tradition of his is to identify players who have surpassed previous season or career norms just days into the season. In my post, I went Jayson one better, predicting which players that might be in 2016.

I thought it'd be fun to take a spin through the picks and see how they turned out. (Spoiler alert: about what you'd expect.)

First the mundane: i predicted Tanner Roark would surpass four pitching wins -- his total output in a sorry 2015 -- in quick order. Despite a winless April, Roark earned his fifth victory on Memorial Day en route to a 16-10, 2.83 season that placed him 10th in Cy voting and increased his WAR eightfold to 5.5.

Likewise for Nick Markakis and Anthony Rendon in homers and RBI. Markakis endured a quirky power outage for the Braves in '15, recording just three homers, all in the second half. He mashed 13 in '16. Rendon, stubbed by injuries last year, rebounded from a 5 HR, 25 RBI season to 20 and 85 in 2016.

No insight was necessary to observe that Jake Arrieta would allow more runs in a couple of bad outings in 2016 than the seven he held opponents to in the last two months of 2015. Sure enough, in three starts covering the end of June and beginning of July, the Reds, Mets and Pirates touched him up for 15 runs over 16 innings. For the season, Arrieta crashed to earth from his 22-6, 1.77 Cy Young campaign to 18-8, 3.10 -- still good enough for ninth in the Cy voting.

Shelby Miller endured a brutal 2015 with Atlanta where he won just once after May despite pitching well. So predicting he'd earn more W's in Arizona was like shooting fish in a barrel. Ha! Fish one, shooter nothing! Miller pitched like snake poop in 2016 and his W-L record reflected it. He won exactly zero games in April, one game in May and one in June. Injury curtailed the 3-12, 6.15 torture that cost the D-backs their #1 pick and two pitching prospects.

Likewise, I thought Captain Underpants, the reliable Hunter Pence, would crush the nine homers and 30 runs scored he produced in the injury-sacked 2015 season. Alas, Pence missed 50 games in June and July of 2016 and authored just 13 homers and 58 runs scored, many of them in a red hot September. Put him on the 2017 list!

To cover just this kind of contingency, I included Corey Seager on the list. The 2016 Rookie of the Year enjoyed a productive cup of coffee with the Dodgers in 2015, tallying 17 times after his September 1 call-up. They don't call us smart asses for being dumb asses: Seager crossed the plate for his 18th run in early May of 2016 and continued crossing it, to the tune of .308/.367/512 and MVP votes. I bet you've forgotten Shelby Miller already.

The Cardinals all but forgot Jon Jay in their outfield last year, so his trade to San Diego and the starting centerfield job offered him the opportunity to top the six doubles and one stolen base he achieved in all of 2015. He did rip 26 doubles, but swiped just two bags all season -- surpassing both previous marks by May.

Dee Gordon and A.J. Pierzynski delighted their employers in 2015 with anomalous seasons they couldn't possibly duplicate in 2016, so I threw them on the prediction wagon. And they didn't -- not even close! Pierzynski's .300/.339/.430 was the best age-38 season for anyone spending most of their time behind the plate and one of the best of his 18-year career. I said he wouldn't even duplicate his 2015's April, when he socked three homers and knocked in 14 runs. And in a desultory .219/.243/.304 campaign that is likely his last, Pierzynski never made it to three home runs and pushed across just 23 runs the entire season.

Gordon led the league in batting average and hits in 2015, legging out 78 of them in April alone. Thanks to a doping suspension, he didn't produce his 78th safety until September and lost 65 points of batting average and 135 points of OPS.

Saving the best for last, there's former South Carolina star Jackie Bradley Jr. JBJ found his mojo toiling in the Minors in 2015 waiting to showcase his transformation in August and September. Consequently, it wasn't until the eighth month that he produced his sixth hit, first double, second homer, first stolen base, fourth run scored and fourth RBI of the season.

And this year? Jackie got his seventh hit on April 20th, and completed the entire Bingo card by May 7th. On that date, his batting line included 28 hits, six doubles, three homers, two steals, 15 runs scored and 14 RBI.

That's a pretty good batting average on the predictions, though, of course, they were all a bunch of hanging curves. Then again, I could never hit a curve, hanging or otherwise.

More Answers To Questions You Didn't Ask

You may have been wondering -- or maybe you haven't. Someone in the last week has posed each of these questions and so I answer them here:

Q. Where will Jose Bautista and Mark Trumbo end up?
A. After years of slamming its finger in the same door, the market is now properly valuing aging, immobile sluggers, and it isn't pretty for their agents. I believed one of the former Blue Jays would wind up back with Toronto because they obviously have a hole to fill at that position. With the parrot carrier now poised to bash homers in Cleveland for millions less than he was seeking, I wouldn't be surprised if Joey Bats re-ups at a discount with the Jays. He isn't exactly winning Miss Congeniality votes from other teams. And Baltimore seems to be in hottest pursuit of Trumbo, but also at pennies on his expected dollar.

Q. What are the Mets going to do with their outfield situation?
A. Give Terry Collins headaches? Best guess, unless something dramatic happens: rotate Cespedes and Granderson through centerfield, giving Lagares spot starts and and shuffling him in as a defensive replacement late in games. Send the non-CF Cespedes/Grandy to right and leave Comforto in left to show he can hit. Jay Bruce is a righty bat off the bench. Lots of options if someone gets hurt or doesn't pan out.

Q. Who are your World Series favorites right now?
A. Answering this question is a fool's errand, but I'm game. The World Champion Cubs are the same team as last year, flipping Dexter Fowler for Kyle Schwarber and Aroldis Chapman for Wade Davis. In the AL, the Red Sox are poised to allow about 400 runs next year. The Cy Young winner is their #3 starter.


Q. Now that Bud Selig, who presided over the Steroid Era, is in the Hall of Fame, shouldn't we vote in guys like Bonds, Clemens and McGwire?
A. I don't really see that logic. Selig didn't cheat. That said, I've always been in favor of putting those guys in the Hall.

Here's the problem: you've got Bowie Kuhn in the Hall of Fame, a guy who had an 0-162 record fighting the players' union and who could hardly name a single accomplishment as the commissioner. You've got Gaylord Perry in the Hall, an inveterate cheater who got caught on the field altering baseballs. You've got Lloyd Waner, a thoroughly average Major Leaguer, in the Hall because he batted .316 for his career even though that was his signature skill and team batting averages topped .300 in the '30s. But you want to exclude the top player and pitcher of their era because there's evidence they took an unfair advantage during a portion of their career. It makes no sense.


Q. With the Braves signing all these old former stars, do they really think they have a chance this year?
A. Puff you're inhaler, Braves fans. These guys are just filler. They're signed to one-year deals. If they play well they'll be shipped out mid-season for more prospects.

Q. What do you make of the Diamondbacks?
A. Much like the United States of America, they hired a pair of amateur hacks to run the organization with predictable results. Now they've gotten professional management in there and find themselves with some promising young assets across the infield. Their task going forward will be to acquire some rotation pieces behind Zack Grienke or they'll never contend. Easier said than done.

Q.Not a baseball question, but what do you think of star college football players skipping their bowl games to prepare for the draft?
A. How dare they act in their own best interest! Major college football is about amateur athletics, not about some money grab, says the Buffalo Wild Wings Citrus Bowl.

Q. If Mike Trout played at replacement level for five more years and then retired after the requisite 10-year career, would he get into the Hall of Fame? How about if he was average over the next five years?
A. No and no, because you need more than five stellar seasons to make the Hall of Fame. But the premise of your question is correct. Mike Trout is the greatest player in baseball history over his first five seasons. (He was also the greatest over his first one, two, three and four.) Give him three more Trout seasons and then five bad or mediocre years and he's in.

Q. What about Sandy Koufax? He was a below average pitcher who made the Hall of Fame with five great seasons.
A. Good point. Koufax got extrapolated credit for all the years he didn't pitch after retiring early. Had he pitched at replacement level for three seasons following that unbelievable run I doubt he gets in.

Q. Will the Red Sox regret trading Clay Bucholz? You can never have too much pitching right?
A. They won't regret getting $10 million closer to the luxury tax cap.

Q. Should the Mets trade Jay Bruce?
A. Okay, you're the GM of another team who could use a big bat. The Mets offer you a 30-year-old .250 hitter with 30-homer pop and mediocre defensive skills. What would you give up to get that? For now, I think the Mets should be glad that they have some hitting options to back that pitching staff.

Q. What do you see from the vantage point of San Diego?
A. The ocean.

Q. Come on, I mean what are the Padres' prospects for 2017.
A. At least they have the ocean.

Happy holidays to all!

Rethinking Lou Brock's Hall of Fame Career

Lou Brock was a gentleman and a scholar. And a slap-hitting base thief. He is on the right side of one of the most lopsided trades in MLB history. As part of that second wave of black players to join the Majors -- his rookie season came 14 years after Jackie Robinson threw open the gates -- Brock brought style and panache to a 19-year career.

A stalwart of three World Series teams, Brock led the NL in base swipes eight times and at one point held the record for steals in a season with 118. He scored 100+ runs seven times and batted over .300 in eight seasons, finishing within three points or less three more times. 

For all this, Lou Brock's likeness smiles brightly upon visitors to Cooperstown, voted that honor in his second year of eligibility.

Tim Raines stands on the precipice of Hall induction in his last

year of eligibility. Raines and Brock had nearly identical batting averages, and while Raines swiped 30 fewer bases he also slugged 15 points higher. Like Brock, Raines was a left fielder not particularly known for his defense despite the burning rubber.

But here's the difference:

Lou Brock didn't walk much. That's a problem for a punch-and-judy leadoff hitter. His lifetime .343 OBP was good, better than average, but not table-setting material. For his career, Brock sported an OPS nine percent better than average. Keeping in mind that average includes all the weak-hitting middle infielders and backstops in baseball, Lou Brock was barely an average left fielder.

Rock Raines earned almost twice as many free passes as Brock in fewer plate appearances, giving him a .385 OBP.  His OPS, despite playing half his career in knee-killing Stade Olympique, shone 23% above the median.

Defense!
I glossed over their fielding ability earlier. The metrics suggest Raines was about average in the pull corner for his entire career, about where Brock measured until he turned 30. For half his career, he rated in the butcher category. Brock lost twice as much value from his glove as Raines. (Baseball Prospectus even less sanguine on Brock.)

Then there's the matter of steals. Raines ran into outs 161 fewer times than Brock. That's a huge difference -- about 10 wins against replacement over the course of their careers.

Even without those 10 runs, Raines was still the vastly better player. According to Baseball Reference, Raines earned 69 WAR over his career and Brock just 45 -- about the same as Amos Otis. That 53% gap is the difference between surpassing the average left fielder's Hall of Fame WAR (65) and falling well short.

Why Is Lou Brock a HOFer?
We value what we measure -- in baseball and in life. Because we measured this relatively insignificant skill -- base stealing -- baseball observers in the 60s and 70s vastly over-rated Lou Brock. In addition, we didn't know how to leaven batting average with on base percentage, so Brock's pedestrian OBP was overshadowed by his excellent batting average.

We know better now, and that's why Raines's Hall support rocketed up to 70% in his penultimate year on the ballot. He has none of the milestones like 3,000 hits (he was too busy walking) or an MVP. He's simply the second best leadoff hitter of all time.

Lou Brock was nothing like that. If he were on the ballot today he wouldn't sniff the Hall.

We Don't Care About the CBA...and That's Great

You've probably heard that the owners and players' union have hammered out a new five-year collective bargaining agreement that guarantees labor peace will extend to 26 years since the 1994-95 lockout.

And your eyes probably glazed over at the terms players' union, collective bargaining agreement and labor peace. This is an excellent development in a sport that used to be consumed with those considerations.

A Little History
From the sport's early days to the 1970s, baseball was ruled by owner-overlords protected against anti-trust restrictions by Congress. Players were literally treated like chattel. When the players' union, led by the brilliant Marvin Miller, began asserting its rights in the late 1960s, the battles with owners were over the larger philosophical issue of whether employees had the right to negotiate the terms of their employment.

It took a series of labor battles, both at the bargaining table and in the courts, and an almost unbroken string of union victories, for the balance of power to shift. By the time of the destructive '94-'95 power struggle that cancelled the World Series and delayed the start of the following season, the millionaire players and their intransigent union chief, Donald Fehr, could no longer credibly argue that the fight was about securing rights.

Although the players mostly prevailed in 1995, many fans were disgusted with them. Members of the union increasingly felt the fight was simply over money. At the same time, the old-style autocrats were ceding their ownership to business people more amenable to the new reality of a freer labor market. In the wake of the embarrassing spectacle that pitted millionaires against billionaires and robbed Americans of their national pastime, both sides recognized the need to ditch the dogma and find reasonable compromises.

Today's Reality
Having passed through that painful chapter, players and owners have been thriving. The bones of contention between them are narrow fights over how to divide a rapidly-growing pot of revenues -- the kind that lend themselves to easier compromise.

So two decades later, of course we have labor peace. Why shouldn't we? Viewed through the prism of the 70s and 80s, this is an accomplishment. But viewed through common sense, it is simply tinkering. The 15-day DL is now the 10-day DL. Qualifying offers for free agents will be watered down. The minimum salary will rise. Wake us up when you get to the interesting parts.

I read an analysis that castigated the union for allowing the owners to "win" this round of bargaining. But that is an antiquated view of the negotiations. The players and the owners  understand that their interests generally dovetail and no longer view negotiations as a win-lose proposition. And as long as that's true, it's generally a win for the fans.

Infrequently Asked Questions

You have questions? I have answers. Some of them are even right answers.

These are the questions baseball fans have been sending my way lately:

Q. Can the Indians return to the World Series next year?
A. Which is to say, can they make the playoffs? Fo' shizzle. Their two injured starters return to join my Cy Young pick, Cory Kluber, and Trevor Bauer is poised to take the next step. They lose Mike Napoli's bat but add by subtraction in the field. If Michael Brantley can return to anything like his 2015 self in 2017, and Lindor, Naquin and Ramirez avoid catastrophic sophomore slumps, they could be even better. With the Royals, White Sox and Twins reeling, only the Detroits have the stuff to challenge Believeland.

Q. When does the Yankees' rebuild pay off?
A. Sooner than any of us want it to. They very likely have the best Minor League system in baseball today, and that's even after Gary Sanchez and Greg Bird made The Show.

Q. Should the Mets sign Yoenis Cespedes?
A. It's not my money, so sure! The Amazins can hurl with anyone, particularly with Gsellman in the mix and a potential Wheeler bounce-back, but they have fewer bats than an aquarium. Getting Neil Walker back is nice, but the Mets had better sign someone who can thump or the fans will be doing the hurling. They can sign Cespedes for some gargantuan contract that he won't be worth, once again playing three left fielders in their outfield. But who's the alternative -- DH Edwin Encarnacion? DH-in-waiting Jose Bautista?

Q. Which is the worst team in baseball next year?
A. i wouldn't bet against the Reds.

Q. What should the Jays do about their two big free agents?
A. Toronto is in a pickle. Lose Bautista and Encarnacion and there go 70 home runs out the door. Each is expecting the kind of deal that could sink a team as they age poorly. The Blue Jays are too good to punt and too smart to bankrupt the future on a 36-year-old defensive liability. I think the brass are hoping the market for Bautista cools and they can reclaim him for a reasonable amount.

Q. Is Andrew McCutchen over?
A. Boy, that would be precipitous -- from the game's most dynamic player to replacement level in one year. Regression to the mean suggests he'll be a 3-4 win player next season -- very good, but not the 'Cutch we knew. After that he's 31.

Q. How good can the Mets be next season? They were ravaged by injuries in '16 but overperformed; could they get a lot better and win fewer games in '17?
A. Depends on the sticks. The lineup they have today couldn't beat O'Neil's Texaco from the Bay Village Little League. They need to find some lumber, whether from inside the roster or plucked off another one. Add some scoring to 140 starts out of deGrom, Syndergaard, Gsellman, Harvey, Wheeler and Matz, and they're a serious World Series contender.

Q. Is there anyone on the free agent wire who can help my Orioles pitching staff?
A. Zippo, zilch, nada, nuttin, nil. Rich Hill's the best moundsman out there and he's 37 with 24 good starts in his pocket.

Q. Are we forgetting about Buster Posey?
A. Who? His output dipped 50 points of OPS in his age 29 season but he's still an above-average hitter with mad framing skills who was worth four wins to the Giants. He's a Hall of Fame argument, depending on how he ages, and still one of the best receivers in the game. It wouldn't surprise me if he hit .300 next year with a bump in home runs and 5+ wins of value.

Q. Who is the most under-rated player in baseball?
A. There are two variables in that question, one of which is, how is a particular player "rated." For the past two years I've touted Marlins outfielder Christian Yelich. The low-key 24-year-old has a Gold Glove, a Sliver Slugger and a .293/.368/.483 batting line over a three-and-a-half year career. 

Q. Didn't Ian Kinsler sort-of get his wish?
A. When the Rangers flipped him to Detroit for Prince Fielder before the 2014 season, Kinsler called GM Jon Daniels a "sleazeball" and wished a 0-162 record on Texas. Since then, he's added 18 wins and a division title to the Tigers, but Texas has won its division each of the last two seasons, even as injuries ended Fielder's career prematurely. So assuming Kinsler hates the Rangers and not Prince Fielder, all he has is the satisfaction that his side got the better of the deal.

Q. What can we reasonably expect from Gary Sanchez in 2017?
A. Not that. Fangraphs projects .268/.329/.490 with 26 home runs and four wins against replacement. Pretty good for $540,000.

Q. It felt like Terry Francona out foxed Joe Maddon in the World Series. Why does everyone love Maddon?
A. For all the right reasons. He's smart and open to new ideas. His players love playing for him. He keeps it light over 162 games. He knows his players and never panics. That said, I agree that Tito did a great job of matching his limited assets -- most notably Cory Kluber and Andrew Miller -- against the Cubs' deep vein of talent. 

Q. I can't decide whether Hal Steinbrenner is a better owner than his father. George was a lunatic but his teams won.
A. That's not technically a question, frequently asked or otherwise. It's a different time now. George could bully the rest of baseball then in a way Hal can't today. New York enjoyed advantages -- not just financial-- that pre-dated the luxury tax, shared revenue and a social media landscape that makes anywhere the center of the media world depending on who's Tweeting. George's brand of insanity would be a colossal failure today.

Q. You made it pretty clear that you think Donald Trump is a sociopath. What policies of his are you rooting for?
A. My problem with Trump is not partisan;  who even knows where he stands on the issues? The problem is he's a despicable human being who remains willfully ignorant of the job he sought. Replacing the Affordable Care Act and enforcing some fiscal discipline would be welcome developments, though I have zero faith he will accomplish either.

Q. What is ahead for Bryce Harper? He was the world's best player in 2015 and then hit .243 last year.
A. Almost no one's career progresses in a straight line. Harper appeared to be dinged up last year, yet he managed a .373 OBP, 24 homers and three wins against replacement. His 2015 might have been a one-off, but Fangraphs projects a big bounce back for him, particularly in the power department.

Q. What do the Cubs do if Jason Heyward continues to suck?
A. The only thing that's certain is that they'll keep paying him through 2023.

Q. Where does Aroldis Chapman land and for how much?
A. Are we assuming he's chasing the cash? Word is he and the Yankees are courting.

Q. Am I crazy or is this Hot Stove season shaping up as the worst ever? The free agent crop is garbage.
A. The free agent crop is mostly garbage. As for your mental health, you should see a professional.

Q. Who is going to be the best free agent pickup this winter?
A. Ian Desmond? Versatile defenders with broad skill sets tend to have high floors, and speedsters tend to age well. Plus he's good looking and of uncertain ethnicity.

That's enough for now. Keep those cards and letters coming. And try to put the questions in question form.

The Mike Trout Award

Congratulations to the AL MVP Award for winning Mike Trout in 2016. 

The best player on the planet doesn't need another MVP designation, or the three other MVPs he earned but failed to procure because writers don't always understand logic.

Mike Trout is already a Hall of Fame candidate at age 25, with more lifetime wins against replacement than Hall of Famer Jim Rice, who toiled for 11 more seasons than Trout has so far played.

Trout is only the third player in baseball history to finish in the top three in MVP voting five consecutive years (joining Albert Pujols and Barry Bonds) and the first ever to do it in his first five seasons. 

No, Trout is in Greatest of All Time territory without MVP awards. But the MVP award was in serious jeopardy of losing its relevance if it had once again failed to attach itself to the transparently best player in the world. Debates over "value" are pedantic and vapid in the face of Mike Trout's prowess and were pushing the MVP award dangerously close to occupying the space currently held by the Miss America Award, the vice presidency and the AFC South champion.

Congratulations, AL MVP award, for winning Mike Trout. And saving yourself.

The Brand New Geriatric Braves

The last place Braves just aged 85 years, inking geriatric pitchers Bartolo Colon and R.A. Dickey, and forking over $20 million in the process. That has led some to wonder if their heads are screwed on straight.

Oh they're on straight all right, and looking ahead. The Braves are telling their fan base that 2017 won't be their year. But keep an eye out for 2018.

Why would a rebuilding squad offer a contract to a 42-year-old in decline and a 43-year-old with weight issues? Because pitchers that age gleefully sign one-year deals, and the Braves need a bridge year to develop their young mound talent. 

Colon and Dickey will give way to the next generation of hurlers, but not until they young dudes are ready. Until then, Colon and Dickey join 25-year-olds Julio Teheran and Mike Foltynewicz in the rotation, with 24-year-olds Aaron Blair and Matt Wisler duking it out for the fifth starter spot.

For the past four seasons, Dickey has been a below-average starter and Colon a mixed bag that could pop at any moment. But as long as they eat innings, the non-contending Braves don't care. Perhaps the pair will teach the young lads a thing or two about life in the Bigs while they're at it.

In the process, Colon aims to become the winningest Dominican pitcher ever, with 11 Ws to pass Juan Marichal's 243. He and Dickey will become the second pair of 42-year-olds in baseball history (after Phil Neikro and Gaylord Perry with the '81 Braves) to start 10 games each -- if they make it.

It's another step in Atlanta's rebuild, which has proceeded at a faster pace than that of several other bottom feeders, like Cincinnati, San Diego, Arizona and Philadelphia. In the meantime, the team's supporters can enjoy their new billion-dollar stadium in the suburbs.

The NL Cy Young -- Grab Your Aspirin

Choosing 2016's best pitcher in the American League was a matter of dicing the available information. Do you more heavily weigh ERA or FIP? Which is more important, WHIP or K/BB? That kind of thing.

The problem with choosing the Cy Young winner in the NL is more one of philosophy. Does the Cy Young go to the best pitcher or the most valuable? Because it's pretty clear who the best pitcher in the world is, and was this season, when he pitched. At 12-4, 1.69, and a 15.64 strikeout-to-walk ratio, Clayton Kershaw is the universe's grand poobah of the mound. That's as obvious as a hurricane.

But Kershaw made only 21 starts this year, succumbing to injury for all of July and August. During those two months, he contributed a grand total of nothing to the Dodgers.

How do you compare that to, say, Max Scherzer, who went 20-7, 2.96 in 100 more innings than Kershaw?

Or to Kyle Hendricks, who bolted from the bottom of the Cubs' stacked rotation to lead the league in ERA, with a 16-8, 2.13 line? He allowed half-a-run more per game than Kershaw, but hurled 70 more innings.

The Crowd of Great Starters
In total, eight starters limited their opponents to fewer than three earned runs per game. That's a fat list of names to consider and it leaves off the likes of Jake Arrieta, Carlos Martinez and Julio Teheran. Among them are legitimate Cy candidates Jon Lester (19-5, 2.44 in 202 innings), Noah Syndergaard (14-9, 2.60 in 184 innings), Madison Bumgarner (15-9, 2.74 in 227 innings) and the special case of Jose Fernandez (16-8, 2.86 in 182 innings before his death, and 12.5 strikeouts per nine innings.)

Lester benefited from the great Cubs infield and Syndergaard from Citi Field. Bumgarner and Fernandez were a hair less impressive than the top three candidates, particularly if you discount hitting for MadBum and sentiment for Fernandez. Kudos also to Tanner Roark and Johnny Cueto for superb seasons, but not ultimately Cy Young quality this year.

So my top three are Hendricks, Kershaw and Scherzer. Let's consider them.

Parsing the Top Three
Because Hendricks played in front of the best infield in the Majors, he could record outs more often than other pitchers without fanning opponents. The advanced stats say Hendricks' ERA was heavily polished by the awesome defensive cast in Chicago.

Kismet smiled on Scherzer's ERA also, but unlike Hendricks he was a horse, leading the league in workload. He led pitchers in wins against replacement, because while Hendricks sat on the bench while a reliever finished the job and Kershaw sat in the clubhouse rehabbing, Scherzer was still on the hill, mowing down batters. 

Scherzer was the most valuable pitcher in the NL this year.

Ultimately, It's The Claw
But here's the thing: Despite missing all that time, Kershaw earned just half-a-win less against replacement than Scherzer. His output was so spectacular, and so transcendent, that he was still the second most valuable pitcher in the league, despite missing a third of the season.

That's why I would vote for Clayton Kershaw for Cy Young. He was simply the best pitcher, by a country mile, in the NL.

Max Scherzer, for his sustained excellence, earns my #2 vote and Kyle Hendricks #3. The ERA is gaudy, but peek behind the curtain and you do see some duct tape and bailing wire.

If your philosophical bent is more in the direction of value, put Scherzer's name on your metaphorical ballot (or real one, if you are honored with a vote.) More than any other NL pitcher, he took the ball every fifth day and gave his team a chance to win. Clayton Kershaw? He won games almost by himself.

The AL Cy Young Conundrum

Remember what an easy call the two MVP races are? Kris Bryant and Mike Trout are far and away the most valuable players in their leagues this year.

But good golly Miss Molly are the Cy Young competitions a quagmire. Depending on how you slice it, one person's ripe fruit is another person's rind. 

Taking a gander at the junior circuit first, there are a bevy of candidates.  

Rick Porcello went 22-4, 3.15 for the Red Sox, with a league-leading 6-1 strikeout-walk rate.  

J.A. Happ, in his season of redemption, earned a 20-4, 3.18 line, though the advanced stats give his Toronto defense a lot of the credit.  

Justin Verlander bounced back to 16-9, 3.04,  and the AL's lowest WHIP and highest pitching WAR. 

The Yankees' Masahiro Tanaka owned a 14-4, 3.07 resume despite a relatively low strikeout rate. 

And Chris Sale, for all the drama of his season in Chicago, pitched to a line of 17-10, 3.34 and completed a league-leading six games.

Verlander's year was stealthy-great. He paced the league in strikeouts and and hurled a healthy 227 frames. The advanced stats say his ERA was partially a figment of defense and ballparks. I award him the bronze medal.

Porcello really shined and would get my second place vote. The advanced stats like him but he's a little light on whiffs, which is the one thing a pitcher can claim nearly total credit for. 

For my money, the best pitcher in the AL was Cleveland's Corey Kluber. At 18-9, 3.14, he didn't lead the league in anything  but was among the best at everything. He anchored the Tribe's killer rotation, pitching a lot innings with an excellent K-BB ratio, a low WHIP and more strikeouts than frames. The advanced stats love him, giving him their highest grades. The playoffs aren't considered for this, but they certainly vindicate this choice.

What's that you say? One of the others is your guy? Go for it. There's no credible argument against any of the pitchers named here.

Just please, don't talk to me about Zach Britton. The guy was a horse out of the Oriole pen, with an 0.54 ERA and 47 saves. He deserves the Rolaids Relief Award, unless Andrew Miller steals it. But the dude pitched a grand total of 67 innings -- one at a time, and that's just a quantum leap easier than throwing six frames each time out. Meausring him against starters is an apples and zebras comparison.

That's not a knock on Britton. Over the last three years, he's thrown 209 innings -- about a full year for a starter. Batters have touched him up for a 1.38 ERA and 0.9 WHIP. In that one year's worth of pitching he earned nine wins against replacement -- roughly MVP level. He's a stud, but so is Mike Trout. And neither one deserves the Cy Young.

The Biggest Game of All

Here's the situation in the critical game on Tuesday:

Your team is among the league's best, despite lousy pitching that could sink its playoff chances. You need a new arm in the rotation.

You could bring up that guy from Triple-A, the one with the 5.38 ERA, questionable work habits and dubious make-up. Last time he was up, he made a mess of things.

Or you could insert into the rotation a professional carnival barker who has never thrown a pitch in his life. He wants to put the glove on his penis and won't listen to the professionals who tell him how to use it correctly. 

The carny says he's going to make a touchdown against Mike Trout. He insulted the manager's wife. He promises to get on the mound and flip the bird to the fans, maybe punch the kid in the front row.

Some of the front office people want the nutcase-- he'll shake things up. He's bold. Fresh blood. He'll make the team great again.

Sure, you understand their frustration, but the team is already pretty good. Besides, the guy thinks your team's problem is that it doesn't score enough goals. He offers confidence without ability. Everyone in the league hates him, including many of his would-be teammates.

The front office guys who want the clown say your triple-A pitcher stinks -- he's just as bad. You might as well try the other guy.

But the Triple-A guy is not just as bad because at least he's a baseball player. The other guy is a mentally ill circus employee.

Then one of the seamheads in the basement office observes that those aren't your only choices. There's a guy, for example, in Double-A who doesn't bring heat but has nice secondary pitches. Good command. Great make-up. A much better alternative than the bum and the lunatic. Why not bring him up?

They're deadlocked and so they come to you, the owner. It's your choice. 

What will you decide?

Why the Tribe Has To Win in Seven

If you can believe in momentum -- that magic spirit that predicts the past -- I can believe in karma. This is the karma World Series, where good is triumphing over evil and the tortured will have their suffering eased.

If I'm reading the gods right, the Tribe must triumph in seven, not six or five. Or if it's God, the loving and righteous God who gave us baseball in the first place, surely He, in his infinite wisdom, even more infinite than a pitching change, must want a Series this year that comforts the afflicted most, which is a seven-game variety.

It's the least they, or He, could do, considering the abomination that will be visited upon Americans next Tuesday. 

The Cubs and their long, long-suffering supporters have already tasted victory and redemption. They have won their first pennant and competed in their first World Series in 71 years. There is joy in Chicago radiating across the nation even if they succumb in the championship.

The Indians have been here twice before in recent years and come away empty, most notably in 1997 when the taste of victory was on their tongues before it dribbled off the (Joe) Table. For them to find redemption requires a dogpile and a parade, just like LeBron and crew enjoyed.

So karma favors the Tribe, but why seven games? Here's why:

With Cleveland up 3-1, a quick Indians victory would have swept back the ill winds and extended the hardship of the unfortunate. Getting wiped out of the World Series suggests the Cubs remain lovable losers, which, given this roster and its expectations, is no longer lovable. On the other hand, clawing back with their season in the balance  before the home fans in their cathedral in Game 5, and then again in Game 6 on the road, shows this young squad's toughness, resilience and heart. 

Which sets them up perfectly for the moral victory necessary when they lose Game 7 to the plucky, duct-taped Tribe. The upshot: the suffering is completely erased in Cleveland; and a goodly part of the pain is expunged in Chicago where they can feel good about how they fought when they were down. 

Making America great again. Because of baseball. And karma.

Then it's wait 'til next year for real on the North Side, with a team that will once again enjoy favored status. Good karma all around, thank God.

Or gods, whichever the case may be.

Addendum: Well, there's no such thing as karma. And there's still no such thing as momentum.