Supernova Jackie Bradley, Greater Fools, and Clayton Kershaw: This Particular Week In Baseball

As babies, my twin boys cried a lot. Like, ceaselessly. I stayed home with them while my wife worked, and being around two screaming infants all day was very stressful, much more stressful than my job had been. I wasn't prepared, although I couldn't possibly have been prepared. My day consisted of trying and mostly failing to comfort them while they screamed. Sometimes they'd sleep a bit and then they'd start in again as soon as they woke up. I don't know what was bothering them, but it wasn't uncommon for my wife to come home and find me crying, too. If you talked to me in those moments, I would have entertained the possibility of trading those two for a jar of bacon grease, and I don't eat bacon.

That was a long time ago, and today I am happy to report that my kids are inquisitive and fun seven-year-olds. Life is good. I wouldn't trade them for anything. My point, for our purposes here, is that under the strain and pressure of the moment, people will make some terrible decisions. Not quite trading-infants-for-lard terrible, but that's not a bad opening offer if you're trying to acquire Billy Butler from Oakland.

A little over a year ago, Jackie Bradley Jr. was coming off a 2014 season that saw him hit .198/.265/.266. The Boston Red Sox played him in center field every day despite that offense (or "offense"), in the hopes that he would figure things out, but in mid-August they finally sent Bradley back to the minors. This was supposed to be the Red Sox center fielder of the future, and his defense was as advertised, but you can't play center in the majors if you hit like my grandmother drives. No? You only run into something every once in a while? Hearing some boos. I understand, but I do not apologize.

Bradley went down to Triple-A and somehow hit even worse than he had in the majors. Bradley's season ended as a microcosm of a terrible Red Sox season.

This was the pivot point. The Red Sox had every reason to give up on Bradley, and they kind of did. They gave Hanley Ramirez $88 million to play left field, gave Cuban free agent outfielder Rusney Castillo $72 million to play right, and moved top prospect Mookie Betts from second base to center field, which you'll recall is Bradley's position. They did all that, but they didn't trade Bradley.

They buried him, but they didn't completely give up on him. They had offers, and in fact, they made offers, like when they reportedly tried to deal him to Seattle for reliever Charlie Furbush, perhaps in an attempt to sell more jerseys ironically. Fortunately for the Red Sox, the Mariners said no. Putting together a team is really hard, and invariably requires some help from teams willing to make even dumber choices than you. Thanks, Mariners!

Pull up the offensive leaderboards at FanGraphs for this season and you'll see Bradley at the top. By wRC+, he is a single point behind Mike Trout as the best hitter in baseball. Only three qualified batters in baseball are hitting for more power than Bradley, and they are David Ortiz, Manny Machado, and Yoenis Cespedes. Almost two months into the season, Bradley, who slugged .266 over most of a whole season less than two years ago, is not just good; he's a premium power hitter and the most valuable player on the Red Sox. Next year, without Ortiz, Boston will need all the offensive firepower it can find. It should help that they didn't trade one of the best hitters in baseball right now for a relief pitcher.

Despite a strange offseason that saw the Los Angeles Dodgers replace Zack Greinke with Scott Kazmir, many analysts and projection systems saw the team as the class of the National League West. As it stands right now, the Dodgers are a game under .500, in third place, and, most humiliatingly, behind the Colorado Rockies in the division. Bill Shaikin, of the Los Angeles Times, noted that, without mega-ace Clayton Kershaw, the Dodgers would—well, it's a short tweet, you can just read it:

— Bill Shaikin (@BillShaikin)May 22, 2016

The Dodgers' win on Sunday night came after that tweet and changed the numbers some, but still, 14-22 is nothing to be proud of. That's a .389 winning percentage, just ahead of the monumentally disappointing Houston Astros. Of course, the other side of that coin is wow. how good is Clayton Kershaw?

He's incredibly good is the answer, but that win-loss comparison simplifies it somewhat. Yes, the Dodgers are 8-1 when Kershaw is on the mound and pretty crummy for all others, but those Kershaw starts include five games in which the team scored five or more runs. The average number of runs scored by a team this season in all of baseball is well below five, and so any team could expect to win the game when scoring five or more. In fact, the Dodgers have lost only four games in which they've scored at least five runs this season and, as Shaikin pointed out, they've done a decent bit of losing. So it would be fair to think that even if Kershaw had not started those games, the Dodgers might have won them anyway.

It's the other three Kershaw wins that are the big difference maker. During those three games, the Dodgers scored one, two, and three runs and won anyway because Kershaw gave up zero, one, and two runs, respectively. Kershaw is brilliant, and the closest we can now come to vintage Pedro Martinez, but he's not worth eight wins. Crediting Kershaw with three wins because of the games in which he carried his team despite subpar offensive outputs is not higher-order math, honestly, but it does line up with the more advanced WAR stats: Fangraphs' WAR says Kershaw has been worth 3.5 wins to date, and Baseball Reference says 2.9 wins is the right number.

That's not to minimize those three wins though. The Dodgers are 4.5 games behind the San Francisco Giants. With 117 games to go, that's a gap that can be closed. Compare that though to 7.5 games out, and instead of talking about a team with a legitimate shot after a tough start, you're talking about the San Diego Padres. That's the real power of Clayton Kershaw. He can take the Padres and make them a squint-and-hope World Series contender.

For the most part, the best teams in baseball last week are the best teams in baseball this week. This isn't just a lack of imagination on my part, or it isn't just that. There's only one big difference from last week's rankings, and it's the result of the fact that, in the past seven days, the Washington Nationals beat up on the New York Mets and the Florida Marlins, while the St. Louis Cardinals split evenly with Colorado and the Arizona Diamondbacks in six games at home. Keeping in mind this is a reactionary list, and that I needed to do something, we're replacing St. Louis with Washington. For now.

5. Chicago White Sox

Quick Comment: Todd Frazier's opposite-field homer on Sunday looked like he was dumping the ball into right field, but the ball kept carrying and carrying. Some batters use backspin to increase distance. Todd Frazier gives his fly balls magic carpets.

Less Quick Comment: My neighbor's kid told me that for next Halloween, he wants to dress up as orange soda. This is a wonderful idea that is pretty much impossible to imagine in real life, and so reminds me of the White Sox' status as a legit contender. Their pitching has been good, but looking at things like XFIP, runners left on base (which tends to normalize over a season toward 80 percent), and strikeout-to-walk percentage leads me to think they're not as good as they look. It could be that, come Halloween, they'll look exactly like a can of Sunkist. It's just hard to see it.

4. Washington Nationals

Quick Comment: Sunday's Nationals lineup featured three hitters with OPS's over 900 and five with OPS's under .700. It's true—everything in Washington is polarized.

Less Quick Comment: Anthony Rendon finished fifth in the MVP race in 2014 at age 24. He, along with Bryce Harper, represented a core of young talent. Then, while Harper grew into a superstar last season, Rendon slid backward thanks to injury and just not playing very well. This year, he's supposedly healthy but still has performed like his 2015 injured self. This made his two extra base hits on Sunday a welcome sight. The Nationals are in first place without Rendon performing at a Rendon-ish level. If they are going to pull away, getting the former MVP candidate back would help.

3. Boston Red Sox

Quick Comment: The best $95 million the Red Sox ever spent was on Pablo Sandoval not playing for them.

Less Quick Comment: Jackie Bradley's hitting streak is now at 27 games, which is both impressive and far too soon to pay attention to a hitting streak. We don't laud home builders who build half a home, and restaurants that serve half-cooked chicken get closed by health inspectors. Bradley is having a fantastic season (see above) but enough about the stupid streak. Call me when he hits 40 games. Actually, just text me. That's fine.

2. Baltimore Orioles

Quick Comment: Orioles hitters struck out six times against Jered F. Weaver. The Orioles treat striking out like smoking. They think it looks cool, but really it's killing them.

Less Quick Comment: How good is the Orioles rotation? Unlike the White Sox, the rest of the team can probably keep things rolling if the rotation stumbles, but so far the Orioles' rotation hasn't stumbled. In fact, despite some outwardly middling personnel, it's been good. Chris Tillman has looked fantastic after seemingly rediscovering how to strike out hitters. Kevin Gausman and Mike Wright have been serviceable, and Yovani Gallardo has done his part by being hurt. Well done, Yovani! Well done, everyone.

1. Chicago Cubs

Quick Comment: The Cubs lost two of three to the Giants. Regular-season baseball!

Less Quick Comment: There are just two things that can derail a team as powerful as the Cubs. The first is injuries. The second is if they all decide to play "drink a gallon of whole milk, spin around as quickly as possible, and see who wins the backward motorcycle race," which, even given the whole loosey-goosey clubhouse thing Joe Maddon is into, seems like a stretch. The Cubs have already lost Kyle Schwarber to injury and it appears they might have just lost Jason Heyward as well, if only for a week or so. So far, they're fine. Just keep the milk away from them, and things should go great.

3. Cincinnati Reds

Quick Comment: If the Reds bullpen sets you up on a date, you would wind up getting kidnapped.

Less Quick Comment: Do you feel sorry for Joey Votto? Sure he'll have more than $200 million when his contract runs out, but he has to watch every Reds game for the next eight years. When you look at it that way, he's probably underpaid.

2. Atlanta Braves

Quick Comment: The Braves won their second series of the year by taking two of three from the Phillies. Well, maybe "taking" is too strong a word. Let's go with borrowing.

Less Quick Comment: The Braves are picking third in this June's draft and that's important, but maybe pulling players off the major league roster to scout local high schools is taking it a tad too far.

1. Minnesota Twins

Quick Comment: The Twins are picking 15th in the draft. Can you believe there were 14 teams worse than the Twins last season? It boggles the mind.

Less Quick Comment: The Twins were 7-17 in April and 4-14 in May before losing on Sunday night to the Toronto Blue Jays. They may not have talent, but clearly symmetry isn't beyond their reach.

The Mets lost two of three at home to the Nationals last week. Then they swept the Milwaukee Brewers, getting themselves back to 1.5 games behind the Nats. Now comes the chance to avenge that series, or at least play better. Though the Mets will be on the road, they miss Max Scherzer this time around. On the negative side, the Mets are scheduled to send former ace Matt Harvey to the mound, which has been a terrible place for him to be this year. The Mets and Harvey are lost as to why he has struggled—well, beyond diminished velocity—but he has struggled mightily. The most recent suggestion, via Newsday, was to take everything out of Harvey's locker and set it on fire. Seriously.

Pitching Coach: Alright Harvey, what's going on?

Harvey: I'm having trouble hitting my spots, coach.

Pitching Coach: I'll say. They're getting to you pretty good, Harvey, pretty good.

Harvey: Yeah, if only you guys had set all my belongings on fire. Then maybe my slider would have more bite.

Pitching Coach: [nods head] You're right, Harvey, you're right. This one's on us. [walks solemnly back to the dugout]

Harvey: [gives up six straight doubles]

Maybe next week we can discuss what sabermetric studies have revealed about setting shit on fire. Either way, the Mets will get that game plus two more chances to make up for that game over the next three days. A few wins and the NL East will be even closer. A few losses and the Mets might need to take drastic measures. What I'm saying is, lose two of three and Matt Harvey's could be the first jock strap to set off the CitiField fire alarm. It's called building a legacy.