Talking baseball

I didn't follow the Sox results that closely over the weekend, but this is clearly a very talented team. I have a hard time seeing the Yanks catching them or the Sox not making the playoffs. I know they've been close to .500 the past 6 weeks or so, but this is a team that, barring additional injuries, should play better down the stretch, as the get Schilling (and hopefully Ortiz) back, add Lester and potentially Buchholtz (sp?), probably improve via trade, and keep getting the benefits from guys shaking off the first half rust (Manny, Crisp, Lugo). Solid SP, very strong pen, excellent offensive talent, a pretty big lead and no more curse. I'd say there's at least a 80%-90% chance the Sox make the playoffs. I'd put Yanks at no better than 40%, which is assuming an upcoming move bigger than adding the lesser Molina.

In terms of trades, I think that the Yanks will make a 1B/Util-type upgrade, like Wigginton, and probably a middle reliever too. Duncan's hot start makes them less likely to go after a big name 1B. Cashman's MO seems to be to not add any long-term contract commitments and to not give up any of their top 10 prospects. That plus Helton's seeming decline and the Coors Field effect I think makes a deal for him unlikely. And I hear that Texas is looking for a whole lot for Texiera after feeling that Daniels got burned big time in his last 2 big trades. (Soriano and Chris Young.) It seems harder to get a big trade done than in a past. I'm not sure if this is because past experience and the new CBA and leading to so many teams are following the same strategy (keep your young studs and buy out their pre-arb years and don't rent a star for only 2 months if he will become a FA at the end of the year) or if there is some other reason.

I don't know about the record for runs in a series or in 3 games, but I'd have to believe it was set in Colorado or in the run-happy early '30's. (Actually, 2 mins of quick 'net research turned up a 47 run series by the Dodgers in the '50's (where they only went 2-1!) and a 48 run series by KC (Athletics?) in the early '60's. Weird. I wonder if there was some strange weather involved, lots of minor league players just called up, or if it's just like flipping a coin a million times and seeing 20 heads at one point.)

On that topic, I believe I've noted over the years that I'm a bigger believer in "luck" in sports that you, my fellow co-blogger. While I acknowledge that the games are decided on the field by real live human beings, as susceptible to stress and bad days as the rest of us, and not by rolls of the dice ala Strat-o-matic, I do think that explanations such as "knowing how to win", "wanting it more than the other guys", and "great team chemistry" are much more often appealing labels placed on post facto results rather than truly explanatory (and predictive) elements. One baseball piece of evidence is that records in one-run games tend to be relatively random, within seasons or from year-to-year, with the exception of varying based on bullpen quality.