Not to pick on Paul Hoynes, but he made quite an interesting prediction for the 2007 Indians:

What will probably happen: The improved Indians will win between 85 and 90 games to repeat their fourth-place finish from last season.

For the Indians to win more than 85 games and finish fourth, (obviously) three other AL Central teams must also win 85 or more games. Sounds just like the luck of a Cleveland sports fan, doesn't it? Last year, the Cardinals won the NL Central and even the World Series despite only 83 wins. Yet the Indians—with all those superfluous wins—won't even sniff the playoffs. But four out of five teams in the same division winning 85 games or greater, that seems a little unlikely, right?

Since 1995 (when the Wild Card debuted), there have been 72 divisional races. And how many times has a division had four or more 85 game winners? Zero. It has never happened.

The distribution of number of teams with 85 wins or greater kind of looks normal, so I'll run with that. If it is in fact normal, then the probability of any one division having four teams with at least 85 wins is 0.3%. That means we ought to see one of these super-dominant divisions every 50 years or so.

Will the 2007 AL Central be one of the strongest divisions of all-time? I doubt it. There are convincing arguments that the White Sox, Twins, and Tigers have all significantly worsened in the off-season. Or, at the very least, a team or two will return to earth after playing over their heads last year. Replacing Francisco Liriano with Sidney Ponson ought to cost the Twins at least twelve wins, but who's counting?

Certainly, it's possible for four teams in a division to hit 85 wins, even with unequal scheduling. If the Indians, Twins, Tigers, and White Sox each split the 54 games they play against the other big three, they still only have to go 58-50 against everyone else to reach that magical mark. (And if you sweep the Royals, you only have to go 40-50 against all other comers.) Just because something hasn't happened before doesn't make it impossible (cf. anything surprising that's ever happened). But when the odds of an event are so small—like less than one percent–small—maybe you should take a little more time to think over such an improbably prediction.

Personally, I think Paul Hoynes is stuck between a rock and a hard place. He wants to stand firm on the insane prediction he made weeks ago that the Tribe will finish fourth in the Central, but also, he is beginning to acknowledge that the Indians have improved since last year, and were probably better than their record indicated in the first place. Hoynes is probably wrong, though crazier things have happened.