Cubs Magic Number

[Parade_Rain]

Ha! I didn't see this before my post. Couldn't agree more. The potential is there for the team with the second best record in the game to watch the NLDS at home. That's not right.

Yep. I edited mine to say correctly 2 of 3. I had 3 of 3. I get that we want separate divisions and keeping regional rivalries, but at some point, it has to be about records and not winning a weak division with a poor record. Essentially what you would have is the best of both worlds. Old school it's all about the record and only NL/DL and new school with extra wild card and division champions.

 

[brett05]

The playoffs need to be reseeded. It will be an absolute crime when 2 out of the 3 best records get a 1 game playoff. I'm not whining about this year, but it is something they need to look at for future reference.

I hear ya, but then I think you need to reseed all teams then. The NL has not only the great teams like the Cubs, Pirates, Cards, but some of the worst teams too which helps pad the numbers in teams like the Reds and Brewers.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

I hear ya, but then I think you need to reseed all teams then. The NL has not only the great teams like the Cubs, Pirates, Cards, but some of the worst teams too which helps pad the numbers in teams like the Reds and Brewers.

That's not padding the numbers. The Cubs have to play the two best teams in baseball as many times as they play the two bad teams you mentioned.

 

[brett05]

That's not padding the numbers. The Cubs have to play the two best teams in baseball as many times as they play the two bad teams you mentioned.

But it helps to pad the wins column. The Cubs are one of the upper echelon teams so they split with the better teams and clean clocks with the weaker ones. The AL has parody where the NL has that part missing.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

But it helps to pad the wins column. The Cubs are one of the upper echelon teams so they split with the better teams and clean clocks with the weaker ones. The AL has parody where the NL has that part missing.

They are 11 games over .500 against teams with above/below .500 records.

41-30 <.500
32-21 >.500

Please go on...

 

[brett05]

They are 11 games over .500 against teams with above/below .500 records.

41-30 <.500
32-21 >.500

Please go on...

That they should be better against teams under .500?

 

[ijustposthere]

That they should be better against teams under .500?

So you were wrong when you said they were padding the wins against teams like the Brewers and Reds?

 

[brett05]

So you were wrong when you said they were padding the wins against teams like the Brewers and Reds?

No, they clearly added wins to their record by playing those teams. That they didn't play better against the bad teams doesn't change that does it?

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

That they should be better against teams under .500?

There are only 9 teams in MLB that are 11 games over .500 overall.

The Cubs are 11 over on BOTH teams above/below .500.

I'd say they're doing just fine.

 

[ijustposthere]

No, they clearly added wins to their record by playing those teams. That they didn't play better against the bad teams doesn't change that does it?

Um, if they haven't played as well and lost games against them, how are they padding their win total by losing?

 

[brett05]

Um, if they haven't played as well and lost games against them, how are they padding their win total by losing?

they are 18-8 against those two teams. You call that losing?

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

they are 18-8 against those two teams. You call that losing?

And the Cardinals are 16-8 against those two teams.

 

[ijustposthere]

they are 18-8 against those two teams. You call that losing?

So you were wrong when you said they should be better against teams under .500?

 

[brett05]

And the Cardinals are 16-8 against those two teams.

and?

 

[brett05]

So you were wrong when you said they should be better against teams under .500?

nope...they are overall only what..10 over as Grim pointed out?

 

[brett05]

FTR, I never said anything about above and below .500.

 

[ijustposthere]

nope...they are overall only what..10 over as Grim pointed out?

So, they are 10 games over .500 against the Reds and Brewers, as you pointed out. You said they were padding their win total by playing those two teams. Yet, overall, they are 11 games over .500 against teams under .500, which is in line with how they've played the Reds/Brewers, and you said they should be better against teams under .500. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Not to mention, you were completely wrong saying they've been splitting against the better teams.

 

[Parade_Rain]

But it helps to pad the wins column. The Cubs are one of the upper echelon teams so they split with the better teams and clean clocks with the weaker ones. The AL has parody where the NL has that part missing.

Trolling trolling trolling
Brett05 keeps on trolling
Rawhide

 

[SilenceS]

they are 18-8 against those two teams. You call that losing?

And they are 7-0 against the Mets. Point? The Cubs aren't one of those beat the bad teams struggle against the good teams. That is the Dodgers.

 

[brett05]

So, they are 10 games over .500 against the Reds and Brewers, as you pointed out. You said they were padding their win total by playing those two teams. Yet, overall, they are 11 games over .500 against teams under .500, which is in line with how they've played the Reds/Brewers, and you said they should be better against teams under .500. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Not to mention, you were completely wrong saying they've been splitting against the better teams.

I never said anything about teams over .500 you did.