Offensive components make up runs, runs make up wins. The Braves have hit .286/.360/.456 since the All-Star Break. Suppose, for a second, that's sustainable*. I used this line-up optimization tool (plugging in what the Braves have done as a whole since the break in every position) to see how many runs the Braves would score. Turns out, that's 5.545 per game, or approximately 288 runs.

*You make the decision as to whether or not it's actually sustainable. I'll say this, the leaders in batting average through yesterday were the LA Angels, hitting more than .286. The leaders in OBP were the NY Yankees, getting on at a .359 clip. And the leaders in SLG%** were the NY Yankees slugging well over .456. I don't think the 2009 Atlanta Braves are the NY Yankees, but they're a much improved team offensively. For the purposes of this piece, we'll assume it is sustainable. What do I think in regards to the sustainability of our offense? I think maybe. Which is a lot more credit than some, or even most, will give it.

**Why do we call it OBP and SLG%? Spelled out, they're On-Base Percentage and Slugging Percentage. OBP make sense--OBP being the percent of the situations you've reached safely out of all possibilities. But what is SLG% a percentage of? It's calculated Total Bases divided by At Bats. In order for something to classify as a percentage, it has to function algorithmically as: something divided by something else of the same units as the first something that encompasses all of, and not necessarily just, the first something. If it were truly a percentage it would be TB/4*AB (Total Bases divided by opportunities to record Total Bases). But no! It's Total Bases divided by opportunities to record a total base divided by 4. It's not a percentage. But that's not what I'm here to talk about. The naming conventions. Why do we use a "P" for "percentage" in OBP and a "%" for "percentage" in SLG%? All other problems aside, we should probably come up with a conventional, unified nomenclature for baseball statistics. Following the example of IUPAC. When we can't agree on how to label something as seemingly simple as the word "percentage"--a word used in a vast number of statistics--the problem's a bit out of hand.

Now, suppose for a second you need 90 wins to make the post-season. You've gotta go 34-18 (.654) over the final 52 games to improve your current record--56-54 (.507)--to 90-72 (.556).

At this point, we're assuming the Braves score 288 runs in the 2nd half. Using that assumption and a little reverse-engineering of the Pythagorean Expectation, I get that if the Braves allow 200 runs over the last 52 games, they'll win 34 of them, enough to win 90 and to make the post-season.

Is it possible to do this?

200 runs over 52 games averages out to 3.85 runs/game. The Braves' ERA, as a whole, is 3.77. I'd say it's possible.

Go backwards. The Braves have a 3.33 ERA since the all-star break. Now suppose, for a second, this is sustainable* (forgetting all previous assumptions, except you need 90 wins to get to the playoffs). The Braves would allow 173 runs over their final 52 games.

*The Giants lead baseball with a 3.49 ERA so again, I'll let you decide whether or not it's sustainable. Remember, though, rough patches from Lowe and Medlen, the use of Reyes and Boyer, and the proposition of Tim Hudson's 2nd half return makes the Braves' already excellent 3.77 team ERA seem a little higher than the team's capable of, still. Again, my answer is maybe.

Again, using a reverse-engineering of the Pythagorean Expectation, the Braves would have to score ~241 runs over the final 52 games to get 34 wins and make the playoffs. That's 4.63 runs a game.

Is that doable?

Again, using the line-up optimization tool, only this time pluging in actual player stats that include a very crude Diaz/Church combined estimation and what we've gotten out of the 9th spot as a whole on the year, I can gain some insight as to whether or not the players on the Braves' roster are capable of scoring 4.63 runs a game. Here are the results.

Very possible. They'd score 5.26 runs/game with that line-up. Of course, loads of statistical noise and not nearly precise enough predictive value, but the results are encouraging. No matter how you slice it, if the Braves play as well as they have since the break, they should have a pretty good shot at making the post-season.

It's possible. Very possible. Don't go giving up on her yet.