Dawn of the yes men

Socrates: Only six of the sixteen managers are likely MoY candidates.
Agathon: Of course.
Socrates: Kerry Wood is the most likely winner of the NY Cy Young.
Agathon: Yes.
Socrates: Remember further that the difference between the Athletics and the Angels is certain and unambiguous.
Agathon: I agree with you.
Socrates: The Cubs and Astros are clearly superior to the Cardinals.
Agathon: Very true.
Socrates: Reds are certainly better than the Brewers or the Pirates.
Agathon: I agree with you.

There's too much consensus among the experts. You can reverse some of the terms above and use the same formulas to describe these predictions as well. BP loves the Astros, ESPN loves the Cubs. BP loves the A's, ESPN loves the Angels. There is a dearth of originality. Are the leading people at these institutions such tyrants that their followers and newcomers feel compelled to suck up and not disagree with them? Are analysts such cowards that they fear calling attention to themselves with a novel projection? Is the inner circle of ball geniuses so desirable that no one will jeopardize their status as a cool kid by disagreeing with so-and-so's clever be-all-end-all take on a given contest?

What is the deal with all the consensus?

It's a bad sign for the fans; it betrays some kind of viral bias in the analysis. Don't tell me there's no ambiguity and no room for original selections when it comes down to choosing the Reds, the Brewers, or the Pirates for fourth, or the A's or Angels for first. Why the huge bandwagon for Bruce Bochy as Manager of the Year? Why the roaring chorus for Kerry Wood as the NL Cy Young? I don't understand why the experts don't work harder to bring something original to the table with these meaningless award brackets.

... The only thing "fearless" about these predictions is the gloating about the accuracy and spin-ability of the previous year's picks. How can San Diego be your "surprise" team when every one picks them as the "surprise" team? That's not fearless. It's cowardly, sheepish, safe, imitative.

... another set of similar-looking predictions here.