30 games left.......

fatbeard · Sep 2, 2016

brett05 said:
But as long as we are taking a tangent, the last 21 WS Champs, only 4 have had the best Regular Season Record.

...a fact that everyone is aware of. Small sample size weirdness in the playoffs means that, historically, the best team in baseball only has about a 20% of winning the WS. Hence the importance of making the playoffs multiple times in order to combat that weirdness, or take advantage of it.

TC in Mississippi · Sep 2, 2016

brett05 said:
Actually the odds are very high against them winning the World Series as it is for any team.

At 23% the Cubs odds to win the World Series are higher than any team entering the month of September in over ten years. Considering that 10 teams make the playoffs those are very good odds.

TC in Mississippi · Sep 2, 2016

brett05 said:
It tells us that winning percentage against 500 teams has nothing to do with determining the World Series champ. Good thing no one hear is bringing that up.

But as long as we are taking a tangent, the last 21 WS Champs, only 4 have had the best Regular Season Record.

Correct. The regular season usually determines the best team while the playoffs are a tournament that produces a champion. These are very different things. Again the 2001 Mariners are considered probably the best team of the last 40 years and lost in the ALCS.

CSF77 · Sep 2, 2016

The only team that bugs me this year is the Nat's. That team can match up with the Cubs.

In the AL. Not sure as I really haven't followed them as much. I would guess Boston would be the team to watch there.

Cubs Bo-Sox series would be awesome. Theo ties to both. Making for a fun series.

TC in Mississippi · Sep 2, 2016

CSF77 said:
The only team that bugs me this year is the Nat's. That team can match up with the Cubs.

In the AL. Not sure as I really haven't followed them as much. I would guess Boston would be the team to watch there.

Cubs Bo-Sox series would be awesome. Theo ties to both. Making for a fun series.

I agree on Washington, which is why I would like LA to win that Division as I think the Dodgers match up very well with the Nats while the Cubs match up very well with teh Dodgers (albeit not as well as they would have last year if they had beaten NY).

Cubs-Red Sox is exactly the series I want to see for those and other reasons. My two favorite teams battling each other although my loyalties to the Cubs won't be in doubt.

brett05 · Sep 2, 2016

fatbeard said:
...a fact that everyone is aware of. Small sample size weirdness in the playoffs means that, historically, the best team in baseball only has about a 20% of winning the WS. Hence the importance of making the playoffs multiple times in order to combat that weirdness, or take advantage of it.

I would not say it is weird at all. It goes to show that 1) The best record isn't always the best team. 2) That the differences among playoff teams are very, very small.

brett05 · Sep 2, 2016

TC in Mississippi said:
Correct. The regular season usually determines the best team while the playoffs are a tournament that produces a champion. These are very different things. Again the 2001 Mariners are considered probably the best team of the last 40 years and lost in the ALCS.

Interesting question that brings up. They had the most wins, but are they seen as the best regular season team since 1976? Hmm. The team that immedaitely comes to my mind is the 1984 Tigers.

brett05 · Sep 2, 2016

CSF77 said:
The only team that bugs me this year is the Nat's. That team can match up with the Cubs.

In the AL. Not sure as I really haven't followed them as much. I would guess Boston would be the team to watch there.

Cubs Bo-Sox series would be awesome. Theo ties to both. Making for a fun series.

I think the Cubs destroy the Red Sox. They just don't have the pitching needed to stymie the Cubs offense. The Rangers and Indians would provide a better World Series if the Cubs represent the NL.

TC in Mississippi · Sep 2, 2016

brett05 said:
Interesting question that brings up. They had the most wins, but are they seen as the best regular season team since 1976? Hmm. The team that immedaitely comes to my mind is the 1984 Tigers.

I'm sure their are arguments, there are always arguments, but when I hear knowledgable baseball observers talk they go back to that Mariners team more often than not. Sometimes with a sort of guilt for feeling that way about a team that didn't win. The thing is the numbers for that team were incredible and dominant. Kind of hard to hold not winning a WS against them considering how well they did in the much, much larger sample size that is the regular season.

fatbeard · Sep 2, 2016

brett05 said:
I would not say it is weird at all. It goes to show that 1) The best record isn't always the best team. 2) That the differences among playoff teams are very, very small.

Were the 2006 Cardinals the best team in baseball?

SilenceS · Sep 2, 2016

My head hurts

TC in Mississippi · Sep 2, 2016

SilenceS said:
My head hurts

Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm done. Sometimes I forget why it's not wise to argue with Brett.

brett05 · Sep 2, 2016

TC in Mississippi said:
I'm sure their are arguments, there are always arguments, but when I hear knowledgable baseball observers talk they go back to that Mariners team more often than not. Sometimes with a sort of guilt for feeling that way about a team that didn't win. The thing is the numbers for that team were incredible and dominant. Kind of hard to hold not winning a WS against them considering how well they did in the much, much larger sample size that is the regular season.

I get it. Just never recall anyone mentioning them and they should. IIRC, they didn;t have a losing streak over two games except for one 4 game stretch in Sept.

brett05 · Sep 2, 2016

fatbeard said:
Were the 2006 Cardinals the best team in baseball?

Not sure. As I have said, it's really hard to pick a team with the issues that have already been brought out.

brett05 · Sep 2, 2016

TC in Mississippi said:
Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm done. Sometimes I forget why it's not wise to argue with Brett.

And why would that be TC?

TC in Mississippi · Sep 2, 2016

brett05 said:
And why would that be TC?

Because Brett everything to you is absolute. You are an extremely knowledgeable baseball fan with a lot of good thoughts and analysis but then there are things that amount of data is going to sway your opinion. I spent several hours once crunching numbers to try to persuade you on something, I think it was WAR related, and despite having very clear numbers with a low margin of error you rejected my case. More power to you, it's actually not even a criticism. Sometimes I can have a great baseball conversation with you but when it comes to arguments like this one it's probably wiser to agree to disagree.

brett05 · Sep 2, 2016

TC in Mississippi said:
Because Brett everything to you is absolute. You are an extremely knowledgeable baseball fan with a lot of good thoughts and analysis but then there are things that amount of data is going to sway your opinion. I spent several hours once crunching numbers to try to persuade you on something, I think it was WAR related, and despite having very clear numbers with a low margin of error you rejected my case. More power to you, it's actually not even a criticism. Sometimes I can have a great baseball conversation with you but when it comes to arguments like this one it's probably wiser to agree to disagree.

Thank you. If I have caused you grief in the past I sincerely offer my apology. And thank you for taking the time to write this out. Your short answer got interpreted much harsher than you clarified here.

TC in Mississippi · Sep 2, 2016

brett05 said:
Thank you. If I have caused you grief in the past I sincerely offer my apology. And thank you for taking the time to write this out. Your short answer got interpreted much harsher than you clarified here.

No apologies necessary and I didn't intend it to be harsh. Baseball arguments are fun for me until they aren't. That's on me.

CSF77 · Sep 2, 2016

"It was one of those days when I wasn't quite sharp," Montgomery said Friday. "I don't know if it was a timing issue. It's just one of those things."

The Cubs may go to a six-man rotation and have Montgomery start again, or he could find himself in the bullpen. It doesn't matter to the lefty.

"My focus will be on getting my timing back," Montgomery said. "It can be a little frustrating at times, but at the same time, I know the season is long and there will be stretches when you're a little off, and it's just getting back to focus."

Lackey has been on the disabled list since Aug. 15 because of a right shoulder strain, and he threw a second bullpen session on Thursday.

Lackey on shoulder health
• The Cubs have a significant lead in the National League Central, but manager Joe Maddon is not looking ahead to the postseason. So far, fans have not been asking him about the potential postseason roster.

"My conversations are, 'Good morning, nice game last night, coach' -- they call me 'coach' all the time," Maddon said. "A few really well-informed males call me 'Skip' once in a while. It's very complimentary. But no advice."

Does he understand the interest?

"That's what fans are supposed to do, and that's what [the media is] supposed to do," Maddon said. "It creates interest. I just can't be that guy. On the top of my [lineup] card every day, I write, 'Do not be a fan.'

"I think it's great that everybody is into us now, and there's that kind of talk at this time of year. I promise you I have not thought about it one time. It is about Friday."

30 games left.......

Well-known member

CCS Staff

CCS Staff

Well-known member

CCS Staff

867-5309

867-5309

867-5309

CCS Staff

Well-known member

Moderator

CCS Staff

867-5309

867-5309

867-5309

CCS Staff

867-5309

CCS Staff

Well-known member