Sailing in Uncharted Waters

by Chad Metcalf

Wolverines, Colonels, Browns, Cowboys, and Quakers; the 2006 Royals are in rare company. Through 42 games, the Royals had scored 154 runs while allowing 259 runs. That is, they scored 3.67 runs per game while allowing 6.17 runs per game, a difference of -2.5 runs per game. That’s not horrible, right? Sorry fellow Royal hopefuls, it is horrible, very horrible.

Thanks to the handy Lahman database, I compared those numbers with historical seasons of yore. Since 1900, no team has finished a season that lopsided. The 1932 version of the Boston Red Sox finished -2.26, resulting in a 43-111 (.279) record. Before 1900, there were many truly bad teams that could be considered an equal of the Royals:

1884 Detroit Wolverines -2.56 28-84 (.246)
1896 Louisville Colonels -2.57 38-93 (.284)
1896 St. Louis Browns -2.56 40-90 (.305)
1888 KC Cowboys -2.40 43-89 (.326)
1884 Philadelphia Quakers -2.43 39-73 (.345)

If the Royals continue their “blistering” pace, and there is no reason to think that they won’t, the 100 loss season in inevitable. Maybe we should start tracking the chances of a 110 loss season. (Although, I guess that getting rid of Joe “Run-Maker” Mays will help lower the runs allowed rate a little bit).

Although it is ridiculous to compare teams across such different periods, it brings home the point of how amazingly inept our 2006 Royals are. Not since the turn of the century . . . the 20th century that is . . . has a team been able to create such a unique combination of incompetence. The Royals look like they are swinging big loaves of French bread, while the pitchers are tossing up meatballs which are being pounded right through the Swiss cheese defense. That’s right, the Royals combine to form one tasty meatball sub. Just ask Albert Pujols.



SIDENOTE: Speaking of the Cowboys, Bradford Doolittle of The Kansas City Star wrote an interesting story about early Kansas City baseball history on Sunday.