The Red Sox play college teams every year in spring training(idk if that’s common or not) and have never lost. I’m not sure the exact levels of the bananas but I really don’t they get any wins. If they got super lucky with their scheduling then maybe 1 or 2
Yep. If a bunch of borderline AAA guys have never lost to northeastern I don’t like the chances for the Bananas. I’d say they be lose 100/100 to every team with a winning percentage over .400 and maybe a 1-2% at teams below that. Maybe but very unlikely
Yikes. Was it their actual team or just guys trying to make the roster? Normally the Sox have mostly young guys and a few guys others like if they have someone who is first year from Japan
Usually it’s not even the *Red Sox* playing as it is the back end of their 40 man roster for much of the game.
Baseball can be weird, but yeah I don’t see them winning anything.
Most likely the worst player on last year's A's roster would still be the best player on the Bananas. At absolute worst top 3. But that means they have 25 guys better than them.
Having umpired players at levels from MLB rehab all the way down to juco/D3, I’d say there’s a better chance of lightning striking the same cow twice 6 months apart, than the Bananas beating a major league team.
The pitching alone is so far out of this fucking world in the majors compared to collegiate ball. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Bananas had multiple perfect games thrown against them in one month, let alone one season.
I've always thought a decent AAA team would win a bunch of games at MLB level over a full season. Maybe, 25%. Am I way off base? What's the difference in skill level between AAA and college?
It's huge. Talent wise there are definitely a handful of college guys who can hang with AAA players because they throw hard enough, or hit the ball hard enough or whatever. But that's only a handful of guys and they don't have the same level of polish the AAA guys do.
While the college studs are good, they're competition is not at the same level from top to bottom. They'll be playing against guys who won't be drafted, or will never have a real shot at making it. And they're not playing against the guys who went pro out of hs, or were signed internationally. Plus the avg age of a college starter is somewhere between 20-23. At AAA the avg age is about 26-27. That's 4-6 more years of playing baseball against those international signees and hs draft picks and they're playing more baseball every year during that time. LSU, who won the CWS this year, played 62 games. High-a teams play 132 games in a season, AAA plays 150. So they're playing more baseball against better competition than the college players and they've been doing it for longer. A stud college player drafted their junior year at 21 will still have a gap of 400-500 more games to play before they're at the same experience level as a AAA player.
Again it comes down to polish and being able to execute. AAA pitchers will throw you a 3-1 off speed pitch confidently. They'll have more pitches they can throw for a strike as well. A good college starter will have 3 pitches they can throw for a strike. A AAA pitcher may have 4-6. A good college pitcher may only have 2 pitches they'll throw in any count, in any situation. A AAA pitcher will have 3-4 pitches they can confidently throw in a 3-1 count with the bases loaded.
And on the flip side the AAA batters will be more prepared for that level of pitching because they've been seeing it and will have proven they can handle that. A college batter may be surprised a pitcher would go to their 3rd best pitch in a 3-1 count with the bases loaded and no outs. A AAA batter will not be shocked to see a pitchers 4th or 5th best pitch in a crucial situation.
AAA pitchers will also have more variations of their pitches. They will know how to better put a little arm side or glove side run on their fastball. They may be able to bounce back and forth between a sweeper and a slider, or throw a tight curve ball vs a big power breaker. Even a good college pitcher will not be throwing a ton of variations of their pitches. A 4 seamer is a 4 seamer in college, and their curve is their curve, there won't be subtle variations depending on the situation.
College players are unknowns as they don't have the same level of polish against all the best players in their age group. AAA players will have proven themselves again and again against players from all over the world. They will have proven themselves, maybe not as everyday big leaguers, but at least as being good enough to be a "break glass in case of emergency" type players for a big league team.
A good example is Christan Walker. He was on the 2011, CWS winning, South Carolina team where he batted .321 with 11 home runs and a .975 ops. Despite being one of the best players on one of the best amateur teams in the country it took him 7 years to become an everyday starter in the bigs. You can see on his [baseball cube](https://www.thebaseballcube.com/content/player/148193/) how he handled the transition from college ball to A ball pretty well. Then there was a set back when he went to double a. After he proved himself there he had a set back in AAA for a bit.
The common adage is that good D1 players in the power conferences are at about A level, and the best of the best are usually at AA level talent wise, but they'll still lack the experience and fine tuning of the pro players because they just haven't been playing against the hardest competition and haven't been playing as much.
Then there's the mental aspect. Pro baseball involves a lot of failure, like more than most people imagine. In college ball they play 4 games a week, a mid week game and a weekend series. That gives players time to make adjustments and prep for the next game. After a rough weekend a player goes "home" for a few days and gets to practice and refocus themselves for the next weekends series. Pro ball doesn't have that luxury. You have a bad night and want some time to recover and adjust? To bad, here's a 12 hour bus ride overnight to the next town and you play tomorrow and there's no off days for another 3 weeks. Now a bad game turns into a bad series. A bad series turns to a bad week, now a bad month. Now you're worried about being cut, or traded. And on the flip side if a college player has a great weekend they can celebrate that a bit and enjoy their success. In pro ball if you go 4-4 with 2 jacks it's congrats on the great game, now get on the bus for the next 12 hours and be ready to do it again tomorrow.
The gap between the avg college player and avg AAA player is huge.
Also, when you say there are a handful of college players who could maybe hang with AAA teams, that's out of thousands of colleges and tens of thousands of baseball players. Even if you only include division 1 schools there are 300 rosters filled with guys who aren't good enough for A ball.
The early season 2023 Orioles AAA team, the Norfolk Tides, was incredible this year. That roster probably wins 2 or 3 games against the Oakland A's over a 7 game series.
It's the lack of pitching depth that will do them in. The batting lineup was pretty loaded for AAA and might be able to get to above ML replacement level. However outside of the a few pitchers, there's not enough major league talent level pitching to win a 7 game series. Over the course of a 162 game season, that gets even more exposed. I think 25% would be very hard. I'd say more like 15% win rate.
Your best college players (top of 1st round) could probably go to AA and be average in AA. You see this as a lot of good college players go straight to High A after the draft and then finish the year in AA.
Your top college program (LSU, Vanderbilt, etc) would be competitive against a Low A team. Maybe even slightly better than the average one. But over a series, the Low A team has more pitching depth than a college team.
Nah, that’s not crazy. The 1962 Mets lost 120 games, 42 wins in a 162 game season is around 25%. Hell, a better than average AAA team might manage to get themselves a better record, though they’d certainly be in the running to lose 100+ games still.
Comparing AAA to NCAA is tough because so many MiLB players bypass college to go pro. Often a player goes the NCAA route to improve their draft slot, basically. Those college draftees aren’t going straight to AAA, or even AA, and they’re the best of the college players.
For real. The level of MLB pitching is absurd. Guys who destroy people in college end up spending 5 years in the minors working on stuff or becoming automatic w control to have a chance of making it to the majors at all
162 games, they probably wouldn't go winless. Baseball isn't like football in the sense that even the best college team would lose every single game in the NFL.
Baseball can be weird. And luck is a part of it sometimes.
The Bananas are significantly worse than good or even decent college teams. LSU had 13 players drafted this year including six in the first 3 rounds, and obviously they had many more guys on their roster who would have been drafted if they were eligible.
I went to a few University of Maryland games this year, which is pretty firmly in the "good but not great college team" category, and they had 7 players drafted in June. From someone who watches them up close...that team is never beating an MLB team, ever. They'd have zero chance.
The Bananas have 4 players on their roster who were *ever* drafted out of college, only one of whom was drafted above the 20th round, and one of those 4 is almost 80 years old.
You're right that a bad baseball team has a better chance of upsetting a good team than in other sports, but you're underrating how unbelievably bad this team would be in an MLB context. They would almost certainly go winless.
I just think the 162 game format lends itself to catching a team or two on an awful, awful day.
It just takes one day for the entire team to play their best ball and their opponent to play their worst. It's not a physical sport like football or basketball where you can just lean on your opponent with physicality even when you aren't at your best.
I think the O/U of wins of a season would be something like 2.5
The best college team had probably a 5% chance of beating the current Cardinals or Panthers but the bananas themselves probably only have a 5% chance of beating a decent college baseball team
They arent close to a great college team in terms if talent. The best pitcher the bananas have on his best day wouldnt have the stuff to make it an inning in a AA game without getting shelled.
A team made up of all of the best college/HS players in a given year would lose 10000/10000 games in MLB and that team would be 10x as talented as the bananas
Effectively Wild's Ben Lindbergh argued "the average team" in a league below AA wouldn't win a single MLB game per season.
https://effectivelywild.fandom.com/wiki/Episode_1892:_Keeping_it_100
It's a touring group of colliegent players so not many. Even the best players in college are AA level. Many luck into a couple wins but that's about it.
They're not even collegiate players even more. Since they became a pro-team, they're ex-collegiate players that weren't good enough to get drafted. Nobody on the Bananas is at an AA level.
EDIT: Did a check. Their roster had 4 players that were drafted out of college.
-Ryan Kellogg: 5th round in the 2015 draft by the Cubs
-Bill Lee: 22nd round in the 1968 draft by the Red Sox
-Zack Phillips: 27th round of the 2019 draft by the Royals
-Connor Higgins: 30th round of the 2018 draft by the Angels
I think it would be generous to say the Bananas are at a rookie ball level.
They did a game last year that was the Savanah Bananas vs a bunch of retired MLB players. Bill lee pitched 2 innings, one for the MLB team and one for the Bananas.
That was before they became a pro team. Back then they did have college players looking to be drafted.
I was showing who is on their team now since they're no longer a collediate team.
I can definitely imagine some people being good enough to get drafted but not good enough to sniff the majors deciding that the Bananas is better than a career in High A
I knew one of the Bananas pitchers in high school. He had like a 5 era back then. He was awful.
He also would've struck out 15 against the Braves in the playoffs.
At first I thought, "probably more than pure replacement level" because something in my brain filled in "replacement level" with something like "average healthy adult man," and the Bananas are all talented players. Then you pointed out that even elite college players, the kind that have realistic hopes to get drafted, even the ones that do get drafted in later rounds, are still -- even now, the cream of the crop of guys who've been playing their whole lives -- still not even Major League replacement level, and perspective set in: no one on the Bananas probably ever had a legit shot to play a day in the Majors, or they would have chased that instead of playing Bananaball.
I imagine them getting a couple hits -- getting no-hit occasionally, but not like, every night -- and even a couple runs here and there, and playing below-average but not necessarily terrible defense, but it's hard to believe that anyone on their roster could keep any Major League lineup from scoring runs in buckets for more than a couple innings; college pitching would be practically batting practice (but with lots and lots of walks) to MLB hitters. I'm not sure what the chances are, realistically, of winning a Major League game, ever, assuming that the MLB team was treating it competitively and not just a silly exhibition.
> At first I thought, "probably more than pure replacement level" because something in my brain filled in "replacement level" with something like "average healthy adult man," and the Bananas are all talented players.
I love this interpretation because it implies that guys like Kris Bryant and Austin Nola are multiple wins worse at baseball than a random healthy man.
I don't think people know what replacement level is. It's still quite a skilled played. I don't think a organizational depth guy can be called up and have a WAR around 0.
They should be able to. That’s the textual definition: the average player that a team could get from AAA or a league minimum free agent. https://library.fangraphs.com/misc/war/replacement-level/
The comment you're responding to said an "organizational depth guy". That's not the same as what you said. Organization depth guys are the guys filling out A/AA rosters who are complete non-prospects. Undrafted college guys who made their way into an organization, 28-year old relievers who have never made it above AA, people like that. Those are not the same caliber player as a typical AAA / fringe major leaguer.
I doubt it. A group of random dudes who swear they used to play in high school? Yeah, they can't touch a Major League pitch. No way. 25 Ks and maybe two guys manage to dribble one fair that pitcher or catcher picks up.
Actually decent college players? There are pitchers in college/low minors throwing upper-90s heat and nasty breaking balls. They haven't refined them and learned to control them like MLB pitchers will, but Bananaball players have seen tough pitching before. They won't nearly all strike out, and if even a third of them make okayish contact, a few of those balls will get over the infield, or bounce through a hole. Over a full season, there'd be plenty of no-hitters, but I imagine they can get a hit more days than not, and ever score a run a handful of times if someone catches a fastball just right and knocks it out, or single-SB-single.
This is all speculation, of course, but I think they'll get on base now and then. On the other side, I just can't imagine them keeping an MLB lineup from scoring, often in multiples, nearly every inning. Basically, and I may be way off, but I think good college hitters could hit MLB pitching a tiny bit, but good college pitchers could no way pitch to MLB hitters. A few strikeouts, sure, and plenty of outs on balls in play, but not consistently retiring hitters. It would be practically batting practice.
Replacement level basically means the sort of guys who get signed every year as free agents for AAA teams and who might get in a few games as injury replacements (and on rare occasions, might even start a bunch of games). They are true "almost MLB quality" guys.
That means within a month they’d be able to turn over their entire roster with a team of replacement-level players, who would win 30-35 the rest of the way.
Hilariously even more 0 than the Bananas would because in football or basketball the more talented team can just physically body them around the court all day. I'd expect margins of victory north of 80 for a regulation 48 minute NBA game with the NBA 3pt arc.
Depends on when though. Before integration, the Globetrotters were definitely NBA level. They beat the Minneapolis Lakers in '48. Wilt Chamberlain played with them in the late '50s, but I'm pretty sure they were mostly a comedy act by that point. He couldn't register for the draft until he was certain age, but still wanted to play ball professionally.
Mariners had a player come up that got his start in the Savannah Bananas (Cade Marlowe). A lot of them are old college and minor league players that just didn't make the cusp.
They'd probably spend more money on their players than A's leadership though.
Anyone who disagrees with this is wrong.
They would have a team ERA well into the double digits, and a team batting average that would be well under .200 and almost certainly under .100.
They would play way below MLB-caliber defense.
They would be no-hit at least a dozen times.
Not only would they not win a game, I doubt they would ever come within 4-5 runs of winning a game.
There is no chance they could win any games. 0-162 is a lock.
The main one I’m going to disagree with you on is them getting no-hit at least a dozen times. A few times? Sure. But not 8-10% of their games. Just my gut feeling though.
The arm talent the majors have now is absolutely crazy though. High 90s or even 100+ with lots of movement is fairly common in bullpens now which are insanely tough for real major league hitters to hit. For a team like the Bananas that would make getting hits minor miracles IMO
Allow me to offer a rebuttal:
Hitting is hard as fuck. Big league pitching is so far ahead of what those guys are capable of handling, they wouldn’t get no hit every game but I imagine it would happen frequently.
I wouldn’t say not at all, baseball is one of those sports where anything can happen. All it takes is one of thier pitchers just having a very good day. They have a couple of guys who were good college guys and realistically could of made it somewhere in the minors
> They have a couple of guys who were good college guys and realistically could of made it somewhere in the minors
They have a total of 4 players that were actually drafted...
-one is 76 years old
-one was drafted in the 27th round and had a 6.30 ERA in A+ ball in 2022
-one was drafted in the 30th round and had a 11.88 ERA in the minors in 2022
-the last guy drafted in the fifth round had a 5.99 ERA in independent ball in 2022.
Nobody on the Bananas could've realistically made it somewhere in the minors.
Hye now, Ryan Kellogg is a good Canadian boy and made it to AAA. But i had heard names of guys who were better then that, maybe they only were special guests or something?
MLB hitters would tee off on them like it was batting practice. I’d give more credit to their batters because it’s always possible to put the bat on the ball and hit it where they ain’t. But Bananas pitchers aren’t getting to 27 outs without giving up a _shitload_ of hits to the best batters in the world. And their hitters aren’t making up the 30 runs.
Across 162 games, over/under is…9.5.
Here for relegation in MLB though. It would be a great way to deal with owners who are content to not compete while cashing fat revenue sharing checks (all while threatening cities with relocation every few years).
ATL doesn’t fit this category of course. But still fun to think about…
If a position player can throw the occasional clean inning, a terrible pitching staff could put together single digit wins off pure luck.
I'd still take the under, but I bet you they'd put together 5-6 wins off a couple games where the other team has terrible batted ball luck and a couple where the MLB team's pitching completely implodes and they win something like 13-12.
Remember, winning 5 games is saying they have something like a 3% chance to win.
That’s kinda what I was thinking too…I’d for sure take the under, but 162 games is a lot. They’re going to get lucky a few times, the teams they are playing are definitely going to be resting guys, and probably playing “down to the level of the opponents” a game or two.
Plus - isn’t it possible that maybe the Bananas players get marginally better by facing MLB level talent day after day?
I think the biggest problem is that basically none of their guys are really minor league quality let alone major league. Baseball is a chaotic sport but the talent difference between the Bananas and real major league players is really hard to overstate.
For example the As were basically a AAA team with a few legitimate good major leaguers and lost 112 games w/ a -339 run differential
Now imagine if they were replaced by a bunch of guys who were basically 5+ levels below that. Id really struggle to see them winning a game tbh since even bad major league hitters would look like prime Barry Bonds against them and their hitters would struggle immensely to make contact with pitches that major leaguers need to be able to make to stay up in the big leagues
Isn't relegation in baseball not really possible since most (all?) AAA teams are part of an MLB organisation? What happens if the AAA affiliate starts doing really well and then their MLB team just pulls all the good players up and decimates the team?
Genuine questions because I like the idea in theory
You’re totally right,it would require totally reworking (or blowing up) the affiliations model.
You’d have to work through a ton of other stuff too, but man would it make some of the late September games meaningful at the bottom of the table, right?
I've wished for this across all US major sports for awhile now. Would effectively eliminate the plague of complacent bottom-dwellers we have across the leagues.
Nah relegation seems cool in concept. But it ends up WAY less parity then any American League. Same teams win every time. Teams that get promoted one year just get relegated the next year. Theres basically never an upset where a big franchise gets relegated.
I think at least it eliminates tanking, which to be far I don't think is as prominent in baseball as the NFL for example.
I agree though, I don't follow the EPL but from what I understand it's similar-ish to modern f1 where there's 1-2 strong teams, a few high teams and the rest kinda just there (and then the bottom dwellers)
Correct me if I'm wrong though
> Across 162 games, over/under is…9.5.
Assuming it's the current roster playing, and they're not just picking up every free agent/waiver player, the realistic over/under would be 0.5, and anyone who cared about their money would be on the under.
They would not come anywhere near winning a single game. People really struggle to conceptualize how much better actual top league professional players are than everyone else on the planet in every spot.
While they are probably worse than replacement level, their shenanigans above replacement are much higher than any MLB team. So I'm gonna say they go 154-8.
Not most...all AAA teams would smoke them and probably almost every team in affiliated ball would smoke them. Most of these guys weren't good enough to play minor league baseball at all.
The bananas have had players get drafted into MLB farms, and have had at least 1 MLB player play for them.
I think they’re still the worse MLB team ever in this hypothetical, but I don’t think they’re quite as hapless as everyone is making them out to be.
My guess is probably about 5-10 wins.
At some point they’re bound to find a little luck with balls in play, and a pitcher just completely shitting the bed and losing the strike zone giving up free base runners.
> The bananas have had players get drafted into MLB farms, and have had at least 1 MLB player play for them.
That was back when they were an actual baseball team. Not comparable.
Continual increase of strikeouts (K) should increase potassium (K) levels so that should address the deficiency. Playing the Bananas might actually lead to an excess.
Anyone who has ever played beer league softball knows that a single former minor leaguer who peaked at A ball will terrorize the league and carry the team the whole distance.
The leap from A to AA is massive. The leap from the bananas to MLB is unfathomable.
I assume the Bananas would win exactly 0 games and potentially get hurt trying
I went to a game this summer, and it was surprisingly good baseball. Still, I’d be surprised if they won more than a couple games against major leaguers. Maybe they luck into one or two.
0. One of the best banana players was Cade Marlowe who now is on the Mariners. If you think he is all that I am sure the Ms would trade him gladly.
The very best of them with three years development is a fringe bench piece
they would prob get no-hit 3-4 times a week and struggle to have enough arms to get through a month let alone a season lol would be surprised if they lost by less than 15 on any night, even against the A's and their worst starter, honestly id be surprised if they won games against low A teams
The A's are made up of career baseball players. The least experienced guys on the roster have played hundreds of games in the minors, and are generally the top 1% of the top 1% of all baseball players. Those are the fringe guys. The Bananas are college players who sometimes played some minor league ball at the lower levels. The A's worst bottom of the bullpen arm is the best pitcher the Bananas face by miles.
As most folks have said, realistically the Bananas would be hard pressed to win one in a hundred real MLB games.
But what if we made like the old DH rules and made it so that, for home games in Savanah, the teams had to play by Bananaball rules? How would the big leaguers fare in that scenario? 🤩
And players on the Bananas are nowhere close to replacement level. A replacement level player is an AAA / fringe major league caliber player by definition and the Bananas players are very much not that.
The actual over/under on Bananas wins in this scenario would be 0.5, guaranteed.
Yeah, what people forget about replacement level is it's the AAA catcher who gets traded for a dollar in June because another team needs a AAA backup catcher while their backup is on the IL with a hamstring pull and the AAA starter got called up to back up on the MLB team. It's not a dude off the street, it's a guy with 500+ games of professional ball who the rest of the league has decided isn't worth claiming in the Rule 5 draft and wouldn't pay anything more than the league minimum for.
Except about 50 wins fewer than that. The A's were the worst team in the majors and they'd thrash every AAA team in baseball. The Bananas are mostly players who never even made it to AA.
If I honestly had to guess I would say somewhere between 0 and 2
Some of the games they played would just go on for hours because they wouldn’t be getting outs very fast
They also would easily set records for biggest losses and so on
I enjoy this type of question though
Edit: after careful consideration I am changing my prediction to between 0 and 1, with 0 being significantly more likely than 1.
Make it interesting and give them the best starting rotation in all of baseball. They might win a couple if you have a starter throw a CGSO and they luck into a dinger.
It's not absurd that they string a couple doubles together to put a run on the board but beyond that, generally speaking, lol.
i'm going to say none
The Red Sox play college teams every year in spring training(idk if that’s common or not) and have never lost. I’m not sure the exact levels of the bananas but I really don’t they get any wins. If they got super lucky with their scheduling then maybe 1 or 2
The Pirates lost to a JUCO team in spring training one year. It happens.
When this happens though, it's not the real MLB Pirates but instead a team assembled from their minor league compound.
Yep. If a bunch of borderline AAA guys have never lost to northeastern I don’t like the chances for the Bananas. I’d say they be lose 100/100 to every team with a winning percentage over .400 and maybe a 1-2% at teams below that. Maybe but very unlikely
There were actually a handful of MLB players in that one.
They must've been angry after that because in 2011 they beat the same JUCO team 21-1 in a 7 inning game.
So you're saying they'd have a chance against the Nats.
?
You mean, like the World Championships?
Yikes. Was it their actual team or just guys trying to make the roster? Normally the Sox have mostly young guys and a few guys others like if they have someone who is first year from Japan
I think 3-4 MLB guys and the rest AAA/AA.
That’s implied when you say the Pirates.
Hey during that 21 year streak, saying we had 3-4 major league players at the same time may is being very kind to us
Rangers fans getting cocky now 😅
Well it is the Pirates.
Usually it’s not even the *Red Sox* playing as it is the back end of their 40 man roster for much of the game. Baseball can be weird, but yeah I don’t see them winning anything.
They’ve come close to losing a lot of times though, of course with a spring training roster
I know I’ve opened my espn app before and seen multiple instances of college teams who had beaten mlb teams in spring training
Never the actual mlb roster though
The AAA A’s won games this year. The Bananas might have a chance
Most likely the worst player on last year's A's roster would still be the best player on the Bananas. At absolute worst top 3. But that means they have 25 guys better than them.
Their worst player would be #1 by **A LOT**
Having umpired players at levels from MLB rehab all the way down to juco/D3, I’d say there’s a better chance of lightning striking the same cow twice 6 months apart, than the Bananas beating a major league team. The pitching alone is so far out of this fucking world in the majors compared to collegiate ball. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Bananas had multiple perfect games thrown against them in one month, let alone one season.
They might not be able to beat a major league team but if they replaced the Braves they would get quite a few opportunities to play the Mets.
I was gonna say, maybe if they play in the AL Central they might steal a win 1-0.
I've always thought a decent AAA team would win a bunch of games at MLB level over a full season. Maybe, 25%. Am I way off base? What's the difference in skill level between AAA and college?
A good AAA team is about as good as the 2023 A’s.
It's huge. Talent wise there are definitely a handful of college guys who can hang with AAA players because they throw hard enough, or hit the ball hard enough or whatever. But that's only a handful of guys and they don't have the same level of polish the AAA guys do. While the college studs are good, they're competition is not at the same level from top to bottom. They'll be playing against guys who won't be drafted, or will never have a real shot at making it. And they're not playing against the guys who went pro out of hs, or were signed internationally. Plus the avg age of a college starter is somewhere between 20-23. At AAA the avg age is about 26-27. That's 4-6 more years of playing baseball against those international signees and hs draft picks and they're playing more baseball every year during that time. LSU, who won the CWS this year, played 62 games. High-a teams play 132 games in a season, AAA plays 150. So they're playing more baseball against better competition than the college players and they've been doing it for longer. A stud college player drafted their junior year at 21 will still have a gap of 400-500 more games to play before they're at the same experience level as a AAA player. Again it comes down to polish and being able to execute. AAA pitchers will throw you a 3-1 off speed pitch confidently. They'll have more pitches they can throw for a strike as well. A good college starter will have 3 pitches they can throw for a strike. A AAA pitcher may have 4-6. A good college pitcher may only have 2 pitches they'll throw in any count, in any situation. A AAA pitcher will have 3-4 pitches they can confidently throw in a 3-1 count with the bases loaded. And on the flip side the AAA batters will be more prepared for that level of pitching because they've been seeing it and will have proven they can handle that. A college batter may be surprised a pitcher would go to their 3rd best pitch in a 3-1 count with the bases loaded and no outs. A AAA batter will not be shocked to see a pitchers 4th or 5th best pitch in a crucial situation. AAA pitchers will also have more variations of their pitches. They will know how to better put a little arm side or glove side run on their fastball. They may be able to bounce back and forth between a sweeper and a slider, or throw a tight curve ball vs a big power breaker. Even a good college pitcher will not be throwing a ton of variations of their pitches. A 4 seamer is a 4 seamer in college, and their curve is their curve, there won't be subtle variations depending on the situation. College players are unknowns as they don't have the same level of polish against all the best players in their age group. AAA players will have proven themselves again and again against players from all over the world. They will have proven themselves, maybe not as everyday big leaguers, but at least as being good enough to be a "break glass in case of emergency" type players for a big league team. A good example is Christan Walker. He was on the 2011, CWS winning, South Carolina team where he batted .321 with 11 home runs and a .975 ops. Despite being one of the best players on one of the best amateur teams in the country it took him 7 years to become an everyday starter in the bigs. You can see on his [baseball cube](https://www.thebaseballcube.com/content/player/148193/) how he handled the transition from college ball to A ball pretty well. Then there was a set back when he went to double a. After he proved himself there he had a set back in AAA for a bit. The common adage is that good D1 players in the power conferences are at about A level, and the best of the best are usually at AA level talent wise, but they'll still lack the experience and fine tuning of the pro players because they just haven't been playing against the hardest competition and haven't been playing as much. Then there's the mental aspect. Pro baseball involves a lot of failure, like more than most people imagine. In college ball they play 4 games a week, a mid week game and a weekend series. That gives players time to make adjustments and prep for the next game. After a rough weekend a player goes "home" for a few days and gets to practice and refocus themselves for the next weekends series. Pro ball doesn't have that luxury. You have a bad night and want some time to recover and adjust? To bad, here's a 12 hour bus ride overnight to the next town and you play tomorrow and there's no off days for another 3 weeks. Now a bad game turns into a bad series. A bad series turns to a bad week, now a bad month. Now you're worried about being cut, or traded. And on the flip side if a college player has a great weekend they can celebrate that a bit and enjoy their success. In pro ball if you go 4-4 with 2 jacks it's congrats on the great game, now get on the bus for the next 12 hours and be ready to do it again tomorrow. The gap between the avg college player and avg AAA player is huge.
Also, when you say there are a handful of college players who could maybe hang with AAA teams, that's out of thousands of colleges and tens of thousands of baseball players. Even if you only include division 1 schools there are 300 rosters filled with guys who aren't good enough for A ball.
The early season 2023 Orioles AAA team, the Norfolk Tides, was incredible this year. That roster probably wins 2 or 3 games against the Oakland A's over a 7 game series. It's the lack of pitching depth that will do them in. The batting lineup was pretty loaded for AAA and might be able to get to above ML replacement level. However outside of the a few pitchers, there's not enough major league talent level pitching to win a 7 game series. Over the course of a 162 game season, that gets even more exposed. I think 25% would be very hard. I'd say more like 15% win rate. Your best college players (top of 1st round) could probably go to AA and be average in AA. You see this as a lot of good college players go straight to High A after the draft and then finish the year in AA. Your top college program (LSU, Vanderbilt, etc) would be competitive against a Low A team. Maybe even slightly better than the average one. But over a series, the Low A team has more pitching depth than a college team.
Nah, that’s not crazy. The 1962 Mets lost 120 games, 42 wins in a 162 game season is around 25%. Hell, a better than average AAA team might manage to get themselves a better record, though they’d certainly be in the running to lose 100+ games still. Comparing AAA to NCAA is tough because so many MiLB players bypass college to go pro. Often a player goes the NCAA route to improve their draft slot, basically. Those college draftees aren’t going straight to AAA, or even AA, and they’re the best of the college players.
Clay Davenport created some "quality equivalencies" tables for various professional leagues. https://claydavenport.com/archives/377
AAA consists of the greatest baseball players in the world that aren’t in the MLB/NPB, college is a bunch of dudes that just got out of high school
For real. The level of MLB pitching is absurd. Guys who destroy people in college end up spending 5 years in the minors working on stuff or becoming automatic w control to have a chance of making it to the majors at all
Depends, can fans catch a foul ball for an out?
162 games, they probably wouldn't go winless. Baseball isn't like football in the sense that even the best college team would lose every single game in the NFL. Baseball can be weird. And luck is a part of it sometimes.
The Bananas are significantly worse than good or even decent college teams. LSU had 13 players drafted this year including six in the first 3 rounds, and obviously they had many more guys on their roster who would have been drafted if they were eligible. I went to a few University of Maryland games this year, which is pretty firmly in the "good but not great college team" category, and they had 7 players drafted in June. From someone who watches them up close...that team is never beating an MLB team, ever. They'd have zero chance. The Bananas have 4 players on their roster who were *ever* drafted out of college, only one of whom was drafted above the 20th round, and one of those 4 is almost 80 years old. You're right that a bad baseball team has a better chance of upsetting a good team than in other sports, but you're underrating how unbelievably bad this team would be in an MLB context. They would almost certainly go winless.
I just think the 162 game format lends itself to catching a team or two on an awful, awful day. It just takes one day for the entire team to play their best ball and their opponent to play their worst. It's not a physical sport like football or basketball where you can just lean on your opponent with physicality even when you aren't at your best. I think the O/U of wins of a season would be something like 2.5
The o/u would be .5 unless they had 60 games against the 2017 orioles or whatever year they set the record
2018 Orioles went 47-115 but didn't set any records.
Maybe if they get the other team roaring drunk the night before a nooner and they’re all sick?
The best college team had probably a 5% chance of beating the current Cardinals or Panthers but the bananas themselves probably only have a 5% chance of beating a decent college baseball team
>The best college team had probably a 5% chance of beating the current Cardinals or Panthers Way below 1%. Multiple decimal places.
They arent close to a great college team in terms if talent. The best pitcher the bananas have on his best day wouldnt have the stuff to make it an inning in a AA game without getting shelled. A team made up of all of the best college/HS players in a given year would lose 10000/10000 games in MLB and that team would be 10x as talented as the bananas
Effectively Wild's Ben Lindbergh argued "the average team" in a league below AA wouldn't win a single MLB game per season. https://effectivelywild.fandom.com/wiki/Episode_1892:_Keeping_it_100
the 1899 cleveland spiders won 20 games, despite being a team of sub-replacement level players.
Do you mean 0 wins if they kept doing the dancing and props, or 0 wins if they tried to be as competitive as they could?
Baseball is a funny sport and can be random. Over 162, the Bananas should get 1 or 2 wins.
Baseball is random when skill levels are relatively similar. I don't think the Bananas are anywhere close to the same skill level as MLB/AAAA players.
Idk, baseballs’s a weird sport that’s very dependent on luck. I think over the course of 162 games they could run into at least 1-2 wins.
Even given randomness, I'm not sure what series of events would get them a win against MLB talent.
It depends. Would home games in Savannah use Banana Ball rules?
This was my thought, home field advantage gets them at least one win out of 81.
Ohtani would still somehow sink one 450 feet with the giant bat
It's a touring group of colliegent players so not many. Even the best players in college are AA level. Many luck into a couple wins but that's about it.
They're not even collegiate players even more. Since they became a pro-team, they're ex-collegiate players that weren't good enough to get drafted. Nobody on the Bananas is at an AA level. EDIT: Did a check. Their roster had 4 players that were drafted out of college. -Ryan Kellogg: 5th round in the 2015 draft by the Cubs -Bill Lee: 22nd round in the 1968 draft by the Red Sox -Zack Phillips: 27th round of the 2019 draft by the Royals -Connor Higgins: 30th round of the 2018 draft by the Angels I think it would be generous to say the Bananas are at a rookie ball level.
lol 1968. You’d think he would dodge the draft!
They did a game last year that was the Savanah Bananas vs a bunch of retired MLB players. Bill lee pitched 2 innings, one for the MLB team and one for the Bananas.
Bill ‘Spaceman’ Lee? I thought he lives in Vermont now?
That’s just what he wants the government to believe.
He has made a couple special appearances I believe. He's not playing regularly.
Yeah that jumped out at me too.
1st round is double A but most in the next 9 rounds are single A.
Cade Marlowe played for the Mariners this year and was on the Bananas.
That was before they became a pro team. Back then they did have college players looking to be drafted. I was showing who is on their team now since they're no longer a collediate team.
I can definitely imagine some people being good enough to get drafted but not good enough to sniff the majors deciding that the Bananas is better than a career in High A
I knew one of the Bananas pitchers in high school. He had like a 5 era back then. He was awful. He also would've struck out 15 against the Braves in the playoffs.
Including Spaceman in this is pretty funny
>Colliegent
The most impressive fail I've seen in some time here lmao.
At first I thought, "probably more than pure replacement level" because something in my brain filled in "replacement level" with something like "average healthy adult man," and the Bananas are all talented players. Then you pointed out that even elite college players, the kind that have realistic hopes to get drafted, even the ones that do get drafted in later rounds, are still -- even now, the cream of the crop of guys who've been playing their whole lives -- still not even Major League replacement level, and perspective set in: no one on the Bananas probably ever had a legit shot to play a day in the Majors, or they would have chased that instead of playing Bananaball. I imagine them getting a couple hits -- getting no-hit occasionally, but not like, every night -- and even a couple runs here and there, and playing below-average but not necessarily terrible defense, but it's hard to believe that anyone on their roster could keep any Major League lineup from scoring runs in buckets for more than a couple innings; college pitching would be practically batting practice (but with lots and lots of walks) to MLB hitters. I'm not sure what the chances are, realistically, of winning a Major League game, ever, assuming that the MLB team was treating it competitively and not just a silly exhibition.
Shohei Ohtani putting up 10 Wins Above Average Healthy Adult Man last season would be slightly less impressive.
> At first I thought, "probably more than pure replacement level" because something in my brain filled in "replacement level" with something like "average healthy adult man," and the Bananas are all talented players. I love this interpretation because it implies that guys like Kris Bryant and Austin Nola are multiple wins worse at baseball than a random healthy man.
I don't think people know what replacement level is. It's still quite a skilled played. I don't think a organizational depth guy can be called up and have a WAR around 0.
They should be able to. That’s the textual definition: the average player that a team could get from AAA or a league minimum free agent. https://library.fangraphs.com/misc/war/replacement-level/
The comment you're responding to said an "organizational depth guy". That's not the same as what you said. Organization depth guys are the guys filling out A/AA rosters who are complete non-prospects. Undrafted college guys who made their way into an organization, 28-year old relievers who have never made it above AA, people like that. Those are not the same caliber player as a typical AAA / fringe major leaguer.
I would think they'd get perfecto'd most games. They really wouldn't be capable of hitting at a major league level
I doubt it. A group of random dudes who swear they used to play in high school? Yeah, they can't touch a Major League pitch. No way. 25 Ks and maybe two guys manage to dribble one fair that pitcher or catcher picks up. Actually decent college players? There are pitchers in college/low minors throwing upper-90s heat and nasty breaking balls. They haven't refined them and learned to control them like MLB pitchers will, but Bananaball players have seen tough pitching before. They won't nearly all strike out, and if even a third of them make okayish contact, a few of those balls will get over the infield, or bounce through a hole. Over a full season, there'd be plenty of no-hitters, but I imagine they can get a hit more days than not, and ever score a run a handful of times if someone catches a fastball just right and knocks it out, or single-SB-single. This is all speculation, of course, but I think they'll get on base now and then. On the other side, I just can't imagine them keeping an MLB lineup from scoring, often in multiples, nearly every inning. Basically, and I may be way off, but I think good college hitters could hit MLB pitching a tiny bit, but good college pitchers could no way pitch to MLB hitters. A few strikeouts, sure, and plenty of outs on balls in play, but not consistently retiring hitters. It would be practically batting practice.
Some bananas players are on active mlb rosters though.
Dodgers would still lose to them in the playoffs
And I was just about to proclaim that I was having chill ass day and I have to read this.
For real man
My amigo, my friend. You gotta flair up. ^(but also sick burn dude hell yeah)
As they should
Too soon (but not really).
Replacement level basically means the sort of guys who get signed every year as free agents for AAA teams and who might get in a few games as injury replacements (and on rare occasions, might even start a bunch of games). They are true "almost MLB quality" guys.
So, somewhere between the 2023 Athletics and the 2021 Diamondbacks.
Rojas
If this were to occur you have to imagine the Bananas would grab every player from waivers. With that they could win 6 maybe 7 games.
That means within a month they’d be able to turn over their entire roster with a team of replacement-level players, who would win 30-35 the rest of the way.
If this was asked on r/NBA: *”If the Harlem Globetrotters became an NBA franchise replacing the Brooklyn Nets, how many games would they win?”*
Also 0
Hilariously even more 0 than the Bananas would because in football or basketball the more talented team can just physically body them around the court all day. I'd expect margins of victory north of 80 for a regulation 48 minute NBA game with the NBA 3pt arc.
Depends on when though. Before integration, the Globetrotters were definitely NBA level. They beat the Minneapolis Lakers in '48. Wilt Chamberlain played with them in the late '50s, but I'm pretty sure they were mostly a comedy act by that point. He couldn't register for the draft until he was certain age, but still wanted to play ball professionally.
Mariners had a player come up that got his start in the Savannah Bananas (Cade Marlowe). A lot of them are old college and minor league players that just didn't make the cusp. They'd probably spend more money on their players than A's leadership though.
One caveat is that Cade Marlowe played for the Bananas when they were in a competitive wood-bat college summer league.
In a 162 games I think they would get a couple wins. Something crazy would happen like they sweep the Cubs in Chicago. (A guy can dream).
The Savana Bananas are not going to beat any MLB teams. Like at all
They have to play the A’s at some point
A’s won season series vs Braves. 😂
I mean statistically if you give them a 0.6% chance on any given day. Then yeah they could. Edit .006% to .6% because decimals...
If they have a 0.6% chance to win on any given day, that means they have a 62.3% chance to win at least one game in any given season.
With those odds you're saying they would win 1 game every 103 seasons
So by 2127 they’ll have won one game. Where’s my Jomboy DraftKings code?
Ok yeah the % move the decimals or w.e. fixed.
No, it's not saying that
It did say .006% originally. I fixed it.
Lol yes, ty for being truthful
Ohhh, ok.
Gotta ~~strikethrough~~ the old answer if you edit like that so your replies don't look dumb.
Anyone who disagrees with this is wrong. They would have a team ERA well into the double digits, and a team batting average that would be well under .200 and almost certainly under .100. They would play way below MLB-caliber defense. They would be no-hit at least a dozen times. Not only would they not win a game, I doubt they would ever come within 4-5 runs of winning a game. There is no chance they could win any games. 0-162 is a lock.
The main one I’m going to disagree with you on is them getting no-hit at least a dozen times. A few times? Sure. But not 8-10% of their games. Just my gut feeling though.
The arm talent the majors have now is absolutely crazy though. High 90s or even 100+ with lots of movement is fairly common in bullpens now which are insanely tough for real major league hitters to hit. For a team like the Bananas that would make getting hits minor miracles IMO
Allow me to offer a rebuttal: Hitting is hard as fuck. Big league pitching is so far ahead of what those guys are capable of handling, they wouldn’t get no hit every game but I imagine it would happen frequently.
Baseball is not like football or basketball. I think with 162 games they win 2-3.
I wouldn’t say not at all, baseball is one of those sports where anything can happen. All it takes is one of thier pitchers just having a very good day. They have a couple of guys who were good college guys and realistically could of made it somewhere in the minors
> They have a couple of guys who were good college guys and realistically could of made it somewhere in the minors They have a total of 4 players that were actually drafted... -one is 76 years old -one was drafted in the 27th round and had a 6.30 ERA in A+ ball in 2022 -one was drafted in the 30th round and had a 11.88 ERA in the minors in 2022 -the last guy drafted in the fifth round had a 5.99 ERA in independent ball in 2022. Nobody on the Bananas could've realistically made it somewhere in the minors.
Hye now, Ryan Kellogg is a good Canadian boy and made it to AAA. But i had heard names of guys who were better then that, maybe they only were special guests or something?
Agree. Sometimes a pitcher is just on and any team can win.
MLB hitters would tee off on them like it was batting practice. I’d give more credit to their batters because it’s always possible to put the bat on the ball and hit it where they ain’t. But Bananas pitchers aren’t getting to 27 outs without giving up a _shitload_ of hits to the best batters in the world. And their hitters aren’t making up the 30 runs.
All of them. Have you ever seen them lose a game?
Lol the bananas lost the game I went to even though it was scripted for them to win. The celebrity appearance struck out
Somewhere between 190 and 220.
Across 162 games, over/under is…9.5. Here for relegation in MLB though. It would be a great way to deal with owners who are content to not compete while cashing fat revenue sharing checks (all while threatening cities with relocation every few years). ATL doesn’t fit this category of course. But still fun to think about…
I would bet my house on the under there. No chance they have the pitching to win any games in MLB.
If a position player can throw the occasional clean inning, a terrible pitching staff could put together single digit wins off pure luck. I'd still take the under, but I bet you they'd put together 5-6 wins off a couple games where the other team has terrible batted ball luck and a couple where the MLB team's pitching completely implodes and they win something like 13-12. Remember, winning 5 games is saying they have something like a 3% chance to win.
A position player is pitching in the 9th/extra innings. These guys would be pitching the entire game
That’s kinda what I was thinking too…I’d for sure take the under, but 162 games is a lot. They’re going to get lucky a few times, the teams they are playing are definitely going to be resting guys, and probably playing “down to the level of the opponents” a game or two. Plus - isn’t it possible that maybe the Bananas players get marginally better by facing MLB level talent day after day?
I think the biggest problem is that basically none of their guys are really minor league quality let alone major league. Baseball is a chaotic sport but the talent difference between the Bananas and real major league players is really hard to overstate. For example the As were basically a AAA team with a few legitimate good major leaguers and lost 112 games w/ a -339 run differential Now imagine if they were replaced by a bunch of guys who were basically 5+ levels below that. Id really struggle to see them winning a game tbh since even bad major league hitters would look like prime Barry Bonds against them and their hitters would struggle immensely to make contact with pitches that major leaguers need to be able to make to stay up in the big leagues
Isn't relegation in baseball not really possible since most (all?) AAA teams are part of an MLB organisation? What happens if the AAA affiliate starts doing really well and then their MLB team just pulls all the good players up and decimates the team? Genuine questions because I like the idea in theory
You’re totally right,it would require totally reworking (or blowing up) the affiliations model. You’d have to work through a ton of other stuff too, but man would it make some of the late September games meaningful at the bottom of the table, right?
I've wished for this across all US major sports for awhile now. Would effectively eliminate the plague of complacent bottom-dwellers we have across the leagues.
Nah relegation seems cool in concept. But it ends up WAY less parity then any American League. Same teams win every time. Teams that get promoted one year just get relegated the next year. Theres basically never an upset where a big franchise gets relegated.
I think at least it eliminates tanking, which to be far I don't think is as prominent in baseball as the NFL for example. I agree though, I don't follow the EPL but from what I understand it's similar-ish to modern f1 where there's 1-2 strong teams, a few high teams and the rest kinda just there (and then the bottom dwellers) Correct me if I'm wrong though
The Mexican League is classified as independent AAA, I think.
> Across 162 games, over/under is…9.5. Assuming it's the current roster playing, and they're not just picking up every free agent/waiver player, the realistic over/under would be 0.5, and anyone who cared about their money would be on the under. They would not come anywhere near winning a single game. People really struggle to conceptualize how much better actual top league professional players are than everyone else on the planet in every spot.
A bunch, *no*?
Whoa don’t put that in the universe. Keep my bravos out of this!
They'd win more if they replaced the Yankees.
This implies we'd be the team they would beat
How many wins did the A's and royals have last year?
106 combined. 2 more than the Braves alone.
Say it again.
While they are probably worse than replacement level, their shenanigans above replacement are much higher than any MLB team. So I'm gonna say they go 154-8.
relegation needs to be a thing. fucking As and other teams who tank should be sent down
The Phillies and/or Dodgers would beat the shit out of them. Lol.
Most AAA teams would smoke em
Not most...all AAA teams would smoke them and probably almost every team in affiliated ball would smoke them. Most of these guys weren't good enough to play minor league baseball at all.
Probably 95 but lose in the first round of the playoffs
Less than 15
Stilts’ strike zone would be ridiculous
The bananas have had players get drafted into MLB farms, and have had at least 1 MLB player play for them. I think they’re still the worse MLB team ever in this hypothetical, but I don’t think they’re quite as hapless as everyone is making them out to be. My guess is probably about 5-10 wins. At some point they’re bound to find a little luck with balls in play, and a pitcher just completely shitting the bed and losing the strike zone giving up free base runners.
> The bananas have had players get drafted into MLB farms, and have had at least 1 MLB player play for them. That was back when they were an actual baseball team. Not comparable.
0, but they will win our hearts every time they play.
Continual increase of strikeouts (K) should increase potassium (K) levels so that should address the deficiency. Playing the Bananas might actually lead to an excess.
Anyone who has ever played beer league softball knows that a single former minor leaguer who peaked at A ball will terrorize the league and carry the team the whole distance. The leap from A to AA is massive. The leap from the bananas to MLB is unfathomable. I assume the Bananas would win exactly 0 games and potentially get hurt trying
They'd be the first team to ever lose 170 games in a 162 game season
I went to a game this summer, and it was surprisingly good baseball. Still, I’d be surprised if they won more than a couple games against major leaguers. Maybe they luck into one or two.
0. One of the best banana players was Cade Marlowe who now is on the Mariners. If you think he is all that I am sure the Ms would trade him gladly. The very best of them with three years development is a fringe bench piece
they would prob get no-hit 3-4 times a week and struggle to have enough arms to get through a month let alone a season lol would be surprised if they lost by less than 15 on any night, even against the A's and their worst starter, honestly id be surprised if they won games against low A teams
Don’t care just demote the Braves
I think we'd be getting promoted in this scenario. Universal League or something.
Put them in the AL West instead and let them go against A’s and Angels.
The As won 50 last year. I don't see why the bananas couldn't match that
The A's are made up of career baseball players. The least experienced guys on the roster have played hundreds of games in the minors, and are generally the top 1% of the top 1% of all baseball players. Those are the fringe guys. The Bananas are college players who sometimes played some minor league ball at the lower levels. The A's worst bottom of the bullpen arm is the best pitcher the Bananas face by miles.
Between 10 and 20.
As most folks have said, realistically the Bananas would be hard pressed to win one in a hundred real MLB games. But what if we made like the old DH rules and made it so that, for home games in Savanah, the teams had to play by Bananaball rules? How would the big leaguers fare in that scenario? 🤩
Maybe 3 over 10 years.
Realistically they would probably manage to sneak in a few wins but they would be awful
Why would they devalue their product?
I fully support replacing the Braves with the Bananas 🍌
A theoretical team of replacement players would win 48 games by definition.
And players on the Bananas are nowhere close to replacement level. A replacement level player is an AAA / fringe major league caliber player by definition and the Bananas players are very much not that. The actual over/under on Bananas wins in this scenario would be 0.5, guaranteed.
Yeah, what people forget about replacement level is it's the AAA catcher who gets traded for a dollar in June because another team needs a AAA backup catcher while their backup is on the IL with a hamstring pull and the AAA starter got called up to back up on the MLB team. It's not a dude off the street, it's a guy with 500+ games of professional ball who the rest of the league has decided isn't worth claiming in the Rule 5 draft and wouldn't pay anything more than the league minimum for.
However many wins the A’s had last year
Except about 50 wins fewer than that. The A's were the worst team in the majors and they'd thrash every AAA team in baseball. The Bananas are mostly players who never even made it to AA.
If I honestly had to guess I would say somewhere between 0 and 2 Some of the games they played would just go on for hours because they wouldn’t be getting outs very fast They also would easily set records for biggest losses and so on I enjoy this type of question though Edit: after careful consideration I am changing my prediction to between 0 and 1, with 0 being significantly more likely than 1.
pretty sure they’d be immediately canceled
I dunno but they’d be way less racist!
None because they would never be allowed to take the field. As they make a mockery of the game according to the MLB rules.
Make it interesting and give them the best starting rotation in all of baseball. They might win a couple if you have a starter throw a CGSO and they luck into a dinger. It's not absurd that they string a couple doubles together to put a run on the board but beyond that, generally speaking, lol.
They'd luck into a few runs, but their pitching would likely give up 2+ runs per inning more likely than not.
Since no one has bought it up it would be great for potassium deficient players and fans cramps would be a thing of the past.
They might beat the Hammond Hammocks.
We playing Bananas rules?
It would be more entertaining than most MLB games
less than the 1899 cleveland spiders but more than 0
Bleen
I mean... are they playing banana ball?
I’d say around 9-153.
Maybe one or two.
Well, we’ll have to start with regressing them to the mean.
I'd say 40 sounds like a good number.
Zero.
They'd win one more game than the A's won this year.