Break up the... Royals?

Jason Michael Barker

Sample size, sample size, sample size.

As a psychology undergrad, the only thing I heard more than to be mindful of sample size was "correlation does not equal causation." Well, that and, "No, I won't go out with you. Please leave." But I digress.

Getting back to sample size, one of the great things about baseball this early in the season is that just about anything can happen. Greg Maddux is 1-3 with an 8.27 ERA. Randy Johnson is 0-2 with a similar 8.31 mark. Miguel Tejada is hitting .192 with a .622 OPS.

In other words, it's still early. If Tejada goes on a hot streak of seven hits in ten at-bats, he'll get that average right up to .270. If Johnson throws a shutout his next time out, his ERA will fall by nearly three runs. You get the idea.

This can be a fun game to play at the team level, though, and the one team everybody is talking about is the Kansas City Royals, who started 9-0 and currently sit atop the American League Central with a 10-1 record. Can they possibly keep this up, you ask? Will they go wire-to-wire, as the 1990 Reds, the last team to start the season 9-0, did? Or are they perhaps this year's Anaheim Angels, destined to win the World Series after finishing more than 30 games out of first place the year before?

Come on now, people! Don't buy into this early-season hype over what is still a pretty bad baseball team. They didn't lose 100 for no good reason last season -- actually, there were several good reasons -- after all. They still don't have much power, they still don't draw many walks, and they're relying on an extremely young and inexperienced pitching staff. As Rob Neyer mentioned in a recent column, however, they do appear to be moving in the right direction by going with young players rather than the likes of Chuck Knoblauch and Roberto Hernandez.

Having spent way too much time on the Royals for one day, how about a quick look around the majors? Disclaimer: It's way too early to be drawing any sort of serious conclusions from the standings, so don't take anything I say here too seriously.

AL West
Oakland started hot, then ran into Anaheim. Seattle looks somewhat mediocre, not to mention old, though certainly not horrible. Texas still doesn't have any pitching. Perhaps this isn't the best division in baseball after all? Nah, they've just been beating each other up so far and each team will be happy when they get to play outside the division in another two weeks.

AL Central
The Royals are hot, but due for a fall. The White Sox are playing well and still could be the class of the division by the end of it, though Minnesota hasn't gotten things going yet. Perhaps they're still in shock over that whole Kirby Puckett thing. The Indians rebuilding effort is going about like you might expect, i.e., not too many wins, though they probably wish Brandon Phillips would starting hitting a bit more than he has. And the Tigers? Wow, what can you say about a team that has only scored 20 runs in 11 games? I'm sorry, it's not just their home park -- they simply don't have any hitters. And quit rushing that pitching staff, would you? Geez.

AL East
Yankees on top, check. Red Sox in second, check. But the Devil Rays in third? What in the name of Sweet Lou is going on here? Don't worry, it's only a matter of time. Rocco Baldelli won't hit .400 this year, and Carl Crawford's sub-.300 OBP will be a huge drain on the offense. And I don't know about you, but I don't exactly trust that pitching staff. Elsewhere, Toronto is looking like Texas North (offense but no pitching) while the Orioles are no good, but probably better than Tampa Bay.

NL West
The Giants leading early shouldn't be a surprise, though their 11-1 record is a bit eye-popping. Basically they've done everything right so far, but of course that can't keep up forever. Another thing that won't keep up forever is the Diamondbacks at just 3-9. Other than the fact that they'll play more games, even though they're pretty old there's no way there're this bad. Everything else is just as you'd expect, more or less. Well, other than that Kevin Brown and Darren Driefort's arms haven't fallen off yet.

NL Central
Parity abounds, as four of the six teams are 5-5 in their last ten while the other two (Houston, Milwaukee) are 6-4 and 4-6, respectively. The Astros have scored surprisingly few runs, though the Cardinals are knocking the ball all over the place. Pretty much the only certainty here is that the Reds have no pitching, while the Brewers are just plain bad.

NL East
Apparently some joker took the standings from a few years ago and turned them up-side-down -- Expos in first, followed by the Phillies, Marlins, Braves and Mets? The Expos have gotten incredible pitching so far, with just 32 runs allowed in 13 games. I seem to recall someone saying Montreal had pretty good pitching... hmm, might have been me. I also recall saying the Mets were overrated, but that's neither here nor there. How about the Phillies, though, huh? Nearly seven runs per game, and getting offense from just about everywhere.

Say, while I've got you here -- you are still here, right? Wait, come back! -- I'd like to throw in a quick plug for my affiliation with yet another online baseball presence, the U.S.S. Mariner. As the name suggests, we're all about the Seattle Mariners. So if you're into that sort of thing (and I know you are), drop by http://ussmariner.blogspot.com.

about the author

Jason Michael Barker is hopped up on doofballs, everybody, doofballs. Although there's nothing to see here, you can still drop him a line at jmb@strikethree.com.

Web Strikethree.com