Hey there, flap jacks. You know, I love Bleacher Report. Period. Full stop. No question about it. But I think the grades they handed out this morning for each Major League team’s performance so far look a little inflated; like they were thrown together by some left coast university professor or somethin’.

Not to be nit picky (well, yeah … let’s be nit picky) but I’d like to point out that you should say, “We will go in alphabetical order by city,” if and only if you actually plan on going in alphabetical by city. I grant you, I hold zero advanced degrees, and I almost had to repeat the third grade, but Arizona, Colorado, Minnesota and Texas were states, not cities, the last time I checked. I dock Bleacher Report a full grade just for not followin’ their own directions. They coulda easily said alphabetical order by location, but did they? No, they did not. Maybe they even coulda put them in order of winning percentage (which woulda made more sense, I think) but they didn’t do that either. Anyway, nuff said.

The Cubs

Following the Joe Schlombowski no-particular-order method, I’ll start with — of course — the Cubs. Bleacher Report gives the Northsiders a B-minus, to which I say, ARE YOU FRIGGIN’ KIDDING ME?!!! How does a team with that line up, that staff, that bench and a pen that I totally don’t recognize, add up to a pathetic 11-10 record? And how does that skid mark of a record deserve a B-minus? No way. I mean if you just go strictly by the numbers, they’re playin’ .524 ball. That’s average, which in the Cheap Seats is a C, pallie. And if you take into account the $184,000,000 of Grade A prime beef grazing in the friendly stockyards of Wrigley Field, it’s a D.

Boston and Houston

The Red Sox, at 18-5, deserve an A. And that’s what Bleacher Report gave ’em. Of course they also gave an A to the Stros (17-9). As a result, a pretty good argument can be made for bumping the Sox up to an A-plus cuz of their historic start. I mean if you can’t get an A-plus when you’re doing somethin’ on the positive side of historic, when can you … right? I’d think about nudging the Stros down a half grade, too. Maybe more. Considering they’re the reigning World Series champs, have been picked to repeat by certain respected prognosticators and, according to Las Vegas odds-makers, are favored to win again as well, pushing Houston down to at least an A-minus is a reasonable move. If you consider that the Stros winning percentage is a smidge under 130 percentage points lower than the Bosox, and you wanna hand the Sox just a solid A, then in the the Cheap Seats Houston gets a B. No more.

The Mets, D-backs and Phillies

What’s more, the D-backs (.696) and Mets (.682) are both playin’ better than the Stros, and the Phillies (.652) are just 2 percentage points behind. How come, then, does Houston get an A from Bleacher Report and the others get a B-plus, a straight B and B-minus respectively? If this kinda grading was going on in a classroom you’d have a riot on your hands. I will say this, though: I’m of the opinion that those fashion-don’t uniforms Arizona has the balls to wear in public deserve some sort of sanction. That could explain their grade, but not the other two. Somebody at Bleacher Report needs some detention.

The Bottom of the Barrel

On the other end of the grade scale, Bleacher Report assigned an F to the Orioles, Reds, Marlins and Rangers. Yep, so far they all stink. They’re aggregate winning percentage is .380. Having been a Cubs fan since the doctor swatted my backside, I’m familiar with that number and I can tell you that it totally sucks. I’ll can also tell you that they deserve those Fs. Where things go sideways with Bleacher Report’s grades is how some of the other crapolla teams faired better than these four.

For example, the White Sox (5-16) were handed a D-minus, but their .238 winning percentage is a shit-ton worse than the four teams swirling around the bottom of the baseball toilet that received a failing grade. Based on that, the Sox deserve an F-minus, pallie. In fact the Sox should have to repeat the first month altogether. Ditto the Royals, who at 5-17 are even worse, winning ballgames at a frigid .227 pace. Nonetheless, they managed a D-minus outta Bleacher Report, just like the Pale Hose. Makes no sense whatsoever.

The Yanks, Cards and Blue Jays

Another oddity in Bleacher Reports first month’s grades are the B-pluses given to the Yanks and Cards for their .609 pace, while they handed the Blue Jays a straight up B for the same 14-9 record. One can argue that a half a grade should be deducted from the Blue Jays just for being in Canada, but all things being equal, all three of those teams earned the same grade … whatever you wanna call it.

Needs Improvement

One last thing: How does a team with a .538 winning percentage — the Rockies — get just a D-plus from Bleacher Report while the Cubs (.524) get a B-minus? I’m thinkin’ Bleacher Report’s request for comp tickets got turned down by the Rockies or somethin’. And how about the White Sox? They got the exact same D-plus grade as the Rockies even though their record is 5-16, 300 percentage points lower than the Rockies. The Tigers, the Dodgers, the A’s, and the Giants, Rays and Nats all have lower winning percentages than the Rockies, yet each received a higher grade from Bleacher Report.

Based on all this, I give Bleacher Report a C for this early season evaluation, and say to them the same thing Sister DeMaurus used to write on my exams: “Needs improvement.”

Of course I could be wrong. But I’m not.

Joe

PS. I apologize to White Sox and Cards fans for using math that outstrips the calculation capacity of your fingers and toes.