162 games is far too small of a sample size to be able to draw any meaningful conclusions. The only fair way to do it would be to play a 10-year, 1,620 game season, then at the end of the decade you award the team with the best record the World Series trophy. You could still give the trophy out every year, but each year would be based on a decade's worth of games. So the 2012 World Series goes to the team with the best record from 2003-2012. For 2013, you go back to 2004 to start aggregating records, etc. That would prevent fluke teams like this year's Orioles from having a chance at winning baseball's most coveted trophy. Why should a team that has a decade-long run of futility get to compete for the World Series just because of a good 162 games. Ridiculous. Also, for teams that are strong over a period of many years, having one down year due to injuries and back luck (think: 2012 Red Sox) won't doom them and prevent them from being able to compete year in and year out for the championship. I don't care about these upstarts who string together a few dozen good games once a decade. I want long-term, sustained excellence.
*edited because I'm not real good at the maths.
Last edited by Art Vandelay on Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.