Sportswriters and broadcasters suck

Sportwriters and broadcasters are like cattle being led to slaughter - they just follow the the sound of the bell.  Once an idea catches hold - eg., "how are the A's doing it with their offense?" - you'll see the same story written by local writers, discussed ad nauseum on telecasts, and written up by national columnists.  There is a short story in today's USA Today about how the A's and Padres are winning with pitching and defense.  As with every other story of this nature, they cite the season totals and point out that the A's are lowest in batting average, slugging, etc.  But what they fail to mention is that before the break the A's were basically a .500 team that was struggling.  Since the break, they have an outstanding record and the offense has picked up considerably, as noted on the MLB website today:

"The offense came into Wednesday's game batting .274 after the break and averaging 5.2 runs per game."

God forbid that a writer should dig into the data for just a moment.  They might see that Thomas, Bradley, Kotsay, Payton, Ellis and Scutaro all have OPS's above .800 since the break, or that they have 5 players over .300 BA (and Bradley just below).  Or perhaps they would notice that the A's are 6th in the AL in scoring post-break (just two runs behind #4).

And not to ignore the much despised Run Differential.  Here are the post-break RD number and W/L differential for each team.  Notice the pattern:
       RD  W/L
Oak   +51  +19
Min   +49  +13
NYY   +37  +11
LAA   +24  +8
CLE   +19  +1
TX    +11   0
Det   +4   +3
CHI   -4   -2
Tor   -16  -5
Bal   -25  -4
Sea   -32  -4
KC    -57  -11
Bos   -59  -11
TB    -61  -4

I'm not arguing that the A's have a great offense, but for the past 8 weeks, they've been productive, with contributions up and down the lineup (Chavez being essentially the only exception).  Writers and broadcasters need to get their heads out, but I'm not couting on it.