Follow us:

Hot Stone League

Larry Stone gives his take on a wide array of baseball issues and weighs in about the Mariners, too.

March 30, 2009 at 7:47 AM

(UPDATE) For what it’s worth: NBA vs. MLB

(SEE UPDATE AT THE END)

You still hear a lot about competitive imbalance in baseball (though not nearly as much as you used to), and how certain teams have no chance to win before the season starts.

That might be true (cough Pittsburgh Pirates cough), but I’d maintain it’s become less about inherent inequities in the game, and more about incompetent management. And that’s a good thing.

But this post is not about the benefits of revenue sharing (I can just hear the collective chorus: “Thank God for that!!!”). It’s just a simple observation. I happened to be checking the NBA standings this morning, and I noticed a lot of really, really good teams, and a lot of really, really bad teams (including our once very own Seattle SuperSonics, now hanging their hats, and their heads, in Oklahoma City).

Specifically, there are four teams with a .700 or higher winning percentage (and until the Lakers lost yesterday, two of those were above .800): Cleveland (60-13, .822), LA Lakers (58-15, .795), Orlando (54-18, .750), and Boston (56-19, .747).

There are six teams with a .300 or lower winning percentage: Sacramento (16-56, .222), Washington (17-58, .227), LA Clippers (18-56, .243), Memphis (18-54, .250), Oklahoma City (20-53, .274), and Minnesota (21-53, .284). And there’s only a handful of games left in the regular season.

How does that compare to baseball? Glad you asked. In the last 50 years, there have been exactly three teams with winning percentages above .700: the 1954 Cleveland Indians (111-43, .721), the 2001 Seattle Mariners (116-46, .716), and the 1998 New York Yankees (106-45, .702). There has never been a team in the modern era (since 1900) with a winning percentage above .800. The highest is the 1906 Cubs at .763.

And in the last 50 years, there have been exactly three MLB teams with a winning percentage under .300: the 1962 Mets (40-120, .250), the 2003 Tigers (43-119, .265), and the 1952 Pirates (42-112, .273).

Sounds like there’s a league with a real competitive balance problem, and it’s not major league baseball.

UPDATE: Thanks to an e-mail from a reader who happens to be a mathematics and statistics major at the University of Washington, I’ve found a blog called “The Wages of Wins” Journal, by three Stanford professors who have written a book called, you guessed it, “The Wages of Wins.” It seems to be an economic- and statistic-oriented analysis of basketball with sabermetric sensibilities. Anyway, in this post, they look at competitive imbalance in the NBA and conclude it’s the worst of all the professional sports.

Comments

COMMENTS

No personal attacks or insults, no hate speech, no profanity. Please keep the conversation civil and help us moderate this thread by reporting any abuse. See our Commenting FAQ.



The opinions expressed in reader comments are those of the author only, and do not reflect the opinions of The Seattle Times.


The Seattle Times

The door is closed, but it's not locked.

Take a minute to subscribe and continue to enjoy The Seattle Times for as little as 99 cents a week.

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited seattletimes.com content access is included with most subscriptions.

Subscriber login ►
The Seattle Times

To keep reading, you need a subscription upgrade.

We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access. For unlimited seattletimes.com access, please upgrade your digital subscription.

Call customer service at 1.800.542.0820 for assistance with your upgrade or questions about your subscriber status.

The Seattle Times

To keep reading, you need a subscription.

We hope you have enjoyed your complimentary access. Subscribe now for unlimited access!

Subscription options ►

Already a subscriber?

We've got good news for you. Unlimited seattletimes.com content access is included with most subscriptions.

Activate Subscriber Account ►