Damn dude that's fucked up. And HILARIOUS.

He played 100 games. Projected over the whole season, he hits about 20 home runs. Still only 28th in the NL.

But then I wouldn't get Harper Lovers ALL over this message board.

And would have 20 HRs if he'd hit at the same pace the whole year. Still only good for 28th in the NL.

I got my WAR number from here:

So if you extrapolate his HRs to a full season, it's 20. He hit 22 and 20 in the last two years. That's still only good for 28th in the NL in home runs.

I am not a Harper hater. I'm just pointing out that the author makes it seem like Harper should be knocking it out of the park every game, when he really hasn't exhibited that kind of power.

I know that, and if you extrapolate his performance over a season, he hits about 20 HRs, which is pretty much what he did in 2012 and 2013. While 20 HRs a year is really respectable, it's not amazing.

I never said he didn't know how to hit. He swatted a respectable .272, and over a whole season at his production he would have had around 20 home runs. That's a really nice stat line for a kid.

About 20, which is definitely a nice addition to a lineup. Even if he'd had 20, he's still only 28th in the NL, which is the "softer" division.

I don't party. I'm married.

He's not bad at hitting home runs, but he's not fantastic. He's no Giancarlo Stanton.

Harper was somehow held without a dinger in Game 2,

Looks like Paul Nauert has the most consistent strike zone to me. Also looks like Paul Schreiber hates calling the low strikes.

I know that exists. What I mean to say is to essentially overlay that to this. So, do schools with higher academic standards tend to be in the blue or red? Is there a correlation?

Has anyone applied academic performance to this? A lot of those schools in the blue are excellent academic schools (Army, Navy, BYU, Stanford).

It's funny, because I just heard a talking head tell me that it doesn't make mathematical sense to steal bases the way the Royals do, and the guys was shooting off about how they are making a huge mistake.

Most of the players in the Women's World Cup play on turf during the year, so I'm not seeing what the problem is here.

If any American sport was perfect for a promotion and relegation system like they have in Europe for the soccer leagues, it's college football.

This is the way it used to be. I'm not sure why they went with divisions in the first place, aside from money and "rivalries", which are ridiculous.