meteorology
I have heard meteorologists say they are advised to be very careful in predicting record weather. The idea is to consider the likelihood that a fallible model is right compared to the likelihood something that has never happened before will happen. That doesn't mean never bet against the model. But there are 5 or 6 weather models, and you may love the Euro but if it is predicting the record and the others are not, stick with the others.
I see that case here. I have dabbled in saber for a long time. I started fantasy baseball in the mid 85 or so, basketball and football just after. I get the ideas that suggest the Cubs underperformed and they will regress to the mean. But.
When it comes to predicting teams I am a huge believer in system. Past success indicates future success. In college basketball, I don't care what talent indicates, I would take Wisconsin or Spartie will win B10 basketball title next year. As a result, until someone proves they can beat STL in the Central, the Cards will win the central.
Because Pittsburgh is good, past performance, and neither Cincy nor Cincinnati are terrible, a wild card out of the central will be difficult. I think the likelihood the Cubs come from out of the playoffs to WS champ is unlikely. I will take the Dodgers. They have been good for a while, I think they will take the next step.
Angels out of the AL. Same reason, they have been good long enough that they are ready for the next step. Much like fantasy baseball, draft a really good hitter about to turn 27.
The Cubs illustrate my problem with pro sports. I understand why they shipped Bryant down. Given the rules, it was the business decision they had to make. But that should not be a factor. The idea should be to field the best team. The meta game is ruining sports. In my dream world, the Cubs lose every game these first two weeks, then miss the playoffs by one game. I don't mind accountants using saber to put together the best teams, I don't want them intentionally not fielding the best team.