I get what you are saying, but I am going by what is on paper and what should (and probably will) pan out. Not by numbers from a very small sample size of this season. Perfect example is the Angels. They are much better than their record (in my opinion of course). When you look at the teams we have faced (angels, nats, cards, only to name a few), our schedule is much easier down the road than it was in April. To take a sample size of what has happened thus far, I do not believe is an accurate way to dispill how 'good' a team is.
So you're saying we should judge teams by how talented they "feel" and not by their actual performance?