07-03-2009, 09:16 AM
So does having every team in the division within 7 games of .500 make the NL Central the worst division in baseball or the best?
The argument for the worst is that no team is standout good. Almost all the teams are mediocre and under-achieving.
The argument for the best is that there is no 1 or 2 teams in the division that routinely get pummeled and hike up everyone else's record. Instead, every team could win on any given day (and do just about every other time). There are currently 5 teams within 3.0 games of first.
While some divisions, like the NL West have 1 team that's having a huge season and 2 teams having good seasons, they also have 2 clubs that are awful.
The NL East is similar to the Central, but with 1 team that's the worst in baseball.
AL West only has 4 teams (a pet peeve of mine) and still has been mediocre even with the A's playing poorly.
AL Central has 2 teams completely out of it and still no team that's very good.
The AL East has 3 very good teams, 1 good team and 1 horrible team (and is probably the best overall division).
The argument for the worst is that no team is standout good. Almost all the teams are mediocre and under-achieving.
The argument for the best is that there is no 1 or 2 teams in the division that routinely get pummeled and hike up everyone else's record. Instead, every team could win on any given day (and do just about every other time). There are currently 5 teams within 3.0 games of first.
While some divisions, like the NL West have 1 team that's having a huge season and 2 teams having good seasons, they also have 2 clubs that are awful.
The NL East is similar to the Central, but with 1 team that's the worst in baseball.
AL West only has 4 teams (a pet peeve of mine) and still has been mediocre even with the A's playing poorly.
AL Central has 2 teams completely out of it and still no team that's very good.
The AL East has 3 very good teams, 1 good team and 1 horrible team (and is probably the best overall division).
I got nothin'.
Andy
Andy