[InterceptPoint]

Only in the head of a baseball statistician would 25 games over .500 be considered 50 games over .500.

[bubbacluck]

Only in the head of a baseball statistician would 25 games over .500 be considered 50 games over .500.

Maybe he meant 50 wins over 34 losses?

[Seaplaner]

Only in the head of a baseball statistician would 25 games over .500 be considered 50 games over .500.

You are correct, the Bums are 25 games above the .500 mean of 59.

Sports writers might not be all that good at that arithmetic thingy.

[The Truth Will Make You Free]

Just like the brain-dead media who at election time report candidate X won by say 8% when the tally was 56% to 44%.

[Mr. Lucky]

The writer apparently has taken a couple of fast balls off his head.

[Svartalfiar]

Only in the head of a baseball statistician would 25 games over .500 be considered 50 games over .500.

Depends on how you look at it. They have to lose 50 games in a row to hit .500, so that's how it comes about. You're looking at their total games and splitting that (84+34 = 118; 118/2 = 59; 84-59 = 25). You're going off because baseball records games as halves, since you need a win and a loss to make a full game. That's how teams can be half games behind another team, is because they've played one less game.