For today's discussion, let's have a history lesson and take a quick trip down memory lane and the way-back machine and ask the question: what does it take to win the Wankdorf League? Can we glean anything from past results? Let's start with a look at the summary final standings for the last 4 years. Sadly, stats are unavailable from the 2002 season, aka, the only time that Chad & I both finished in the money. I'm sure Jake agrees with us that this is an atrocity.
|1.||Le Dupont Torkies||91.5|
|4.||The Spam Avengers||82|
|11.||The Sex Offenders||46|
|2.||The Duck Snorts||96.5|
|3.||Le Dupont Torkies||89|
|4.||The Spam Avengers||85|
|6.||Winter of Discontent||72|
|7.||Jake in Progress||67.5|
|8.||i am esix snead||52|
|1.||Le Dupont Torkies||106|
|2.||The Spam Avengers||88.5|
|3.||Summer of Jake||88|
|4.||ghost of mark eaton||78|
|5.||Varitek is a pussy!||63.5|
|6.||Roses In May||55.5|
|8.||Kevin Brown's Hand||54.5|
|10.||Wu Tang Financial||49.5|
|12.||The Freedom Haters||42|
|1.||The Spam Avengers||84|
|3.||Atoms For Peace||79.5|
|5.||Wu Tang Financial||77|
|7.||The 73 Pintos||67.5|
|9.||dead midget storage||60.5|
|11.||Glee Club Studs||38.5|
Where does this leave us, besides nostalgic? Well, let's take a few cursory observations from the summary statistics:
(1) The names may change, but the e.e. cummings style still remains the same. Seeing Ironhead's team names with some classic old ones (dead midget storage?) is just fantastmic all around. In fact, some of our owners, both active and retired, deserve rounds of applause for their well-done squad names, with personal faves being the Glee Club Studs, i am esix snead, and the always great Wu Tang Financial. It almost makes me want to ask Mike what the hell is wrong with him.
(2) Did Corey know what he was doing at any time in this league? Speaking of ghosts of owners, the WATN series will begin post-Memorial Day. If someone has found the dungeon in where Dave lies, you are my hero.
(3) 2003 appears to be the "fluke" season, in that Alex needed a mere 84 points to win, the fact that I actually finished in the money, and the difference between 3rd and 9th was under 20 points. (Hell, the difference between 3rd and 5th was under 3 points.) All the other years, including 2002, required a 90+ point effort to take the top spot.
(4) On that subject, let's note that the 3rd best finish was Teddy's runner-up showing in '05, where his squad just lost to newcomer Scot by about 0.05 ERA. Yowks.
(5) Similarly, it takes an 85+ point effort to hit the board, the fluky 2003 season aside. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like this was the case in '02 as well.)
Which season do we appear to be echoing in '07? Well, we have an uber-sucky team that happens to be mine, which we see every year but 2004 (where our beloved Commish's 42 took the cellar). While Tucker had a huge edge about 3 weeks ago, that's start to dissipate slightly, much like we've seen in prior years (in 2003, I had about 106 points on Memorial Day). And there appear to be 5 times in prime contention with no fewer than 5 other squads in position to make a belated run at it in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters. So the best analog? Probably....last year.
Next post we'll go beyond the cursory review and see what a category-by-category breakdown shows us about the winners. I'd like to see I could use regression analysis, standard deviations, and ball bearings, but I'm a fricking litigator.