PDA

View Full Version : Do the Reds Have Any Chance Whatsoever This Year?



Pages : [1] 2

camisadelgolf
08-08-2007, 08:43 PM
I know, I know . . . I've watched the Reds all year. At times, they've been downright terrible. But you know what? The rest of the division hasn't exactly been on fire all year either. What I want to know is this: Do the Reds have any chance of winning the NL Central this year? It might not be as unreasonable as you think . . .

Let's say the Brewers go 21-26 for the rest of the year. The way they've been playing lately, that wouldn't be too shocking of a surprise. That would put the Cubs in prime position to take over first place, right?. Well, the Cubs, who are without Alfonso Soriano for a while, could potentially falter a bit and go 23-27 for the rest of the year. If those happened, what would the Reds have to do to be in first place? Surprisingly, they'd have to win less than two-thirds of the rest of their games. So what do you think? Is there any chance at all we could we see something like this?


Team Today Remndr Total
Mil 60-55 21-26 81-81
Chi 58-54 23-27 81-81
Cin 48-64 33-17 81-81

Matt700wlw
08-08-2007, 08:45 PM
No.

Tom Servo
08-08-2007, 08:46 PM
We just need Bill Bray.

KronoRed
08-08-2007, 08:48 PM
Good Lord no.

paintmered
08-08-2007, 08:52 PM
I have a better chance of winning Petra Nemcova than the Reds winning the central.

redsfan30
08-08-2007, 08:55 PM
33 out of 50 would be a tall order. Chicago and Milwaukee are definetly capable of the remaining records you provided.

Never give up hope.

camisadelgolf
08-08-2007, 08:57 PM
For the record, 40% of the last 45 Reds games come against the Brewers or the Cubs. That's a huge chance to make up some ground.

Falls City Beer
08-08-2007, 08:58 PM
No. But St. Louis does. Once again, this division is pathetic, and the Brewers are fading fast.

I still think the Reds will finish last in the division.

redsfan30
08-08-2007, 08:59 PM
For the record, 40% of the last 45 Reds games come against the Brewers or the Cubs. That's a huge chance to make up some ground.

Good point.

RedLegSuperStar
08-08-2007, 09:01 PM
Umm.. No..

GAC
08-08-2007, 09:06 PM
With me, and from observing this team this year, it doesn't matter if they have a chance or not. This isn't 2006. Learn from 2006. Evaluate, pinpoint weakneses, problems, and build from there.

You have youngster that should be ready over the next year (or two), like Votto, Bailey, and Bruce. You're losing Milton's contract this year. Jr's after next year. You just got rid of Lohse's 4 mil. You lose Conine's 2 mil after this year. Consider that money in future deliberations.

Renegotiate Dunn's contract. 3 yr 45 mil - 4 yr 60 mil? Start there.

Then..... pitching, pitching, pitching.

I have no idea what is going to be available, pitching-wise, in the off-season; but they have to improve vastly in this area.

And continue to try and acquire young talent for this farm system.

RedsBaron
08-08-2007, 09:09 PM
I have a better chance of winning Petra Nemcova than the Reds winning the central.

I'd prefer Petra.

Falls City Beer
08-08-2007, 09:11 PM
I'd prefer Petra.

Call me crazy, but I'd much rather the Reds win the Central than "know" this swimsuit model.

Call me a true fan. :)

Eric_Davis
08-08-2007, 09:50 PM
10 games back.

Redsland
08-08-2007, 10:11 PM
Have there been any indications that this team is capable of sustained winning? If not, then there's your answer.

Falls City Beer
08-08-2007, 10:13 PM
Have there been any indications that this team is capable of sustained winning? If not, then there's your answer.

No, but there's every kind of indication that this division is winnable, virtually every year; and there are all kinds of indications that this team can't seize that opportunity.

mbgrayson
08-08-2007, 10:37 PM
Almost no chance at all.

To be exact, their chances of making the playoffs are about 1/10 of 1%. See the Baseball Prospectus post-season odds report HERE (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php).

Not only would the Reds have to win over 2/3rds just to win 81, and the Brew crew AND the Cubs lose over half, but St. Louis and Houston would have to do worse than the Reds too, since they are both above us in the standings.

The problem is there are lots of inter-division games. For example, the Cards play the Brewers and the Cubs a total of 13 games, and Houston and Pittsburgh 13 more. Of those 26 games, either the Cards OR one of our inter-divisional rivals WILL win. This illustrates why it will be hard for everyone in the division besides the Reds to have a lopsided losing record.

The odds report linked above estimates that it will take 86 wins to win the NL central. I will be elated if the Reds win over half of their remaining games the rest of the way.

camisadelgolf
08-08-2007, 10:39 PM
The Reds haven't shown that they are capable of sustained winning, but last year, the Cardinals showed on multiple occasions that they are capable of sustained losing.

camisadelgolf
08-08-2007, 10:48 PM
Almost no chance at all.

To be exact, their chances of making the playoffs is about 1/10 of 1%. See the Baseball Prospectus post-season odds report HERE (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php).

Not only would the Reds have to win over 2/3rds just to win 81, and the Brew crew AND the Cubs lose over half, but St. Louis and Houston would have to do worse than the Reds too, since they are both above us in the standings.

The problem is there are lots of inter-division games. For example, the Cards play the Brewers and the Cubs a total of 13 games, and Houston and Pittsburgh 13 more. Of those 26 games, either the Cards OR one of our inter-divisional rivals WILL win. This illustrates why it will be hard for everyone in the division besides the Reds to have a lopsided losing record.

The odds report linked above estimates that it will take 86 wins to win the NL central. I will be elated if the Reds win over half of their remaining games the rest of the way.


So you're telling me there's a chance?

http://static.flickr.com/68/156968740_93ed34f0c2_m.jpg

RedsManRick
08-08-2007, 10:51 PM
The problem with projections requiring us to play .700 ball the rest of the year is that we are precisely one of the teams least likely to play that sort of ball.

Falls City Beer
08-08-2007, 10:54 PM
Teams as currently unstable and thin as the Reds are don't do anything particularly well for very long at all.

And on top of talent thinness, there's I'm guessing a real sense of chaos both at the top and in the locker room.

fearofpopvol1
08-08-2007, 11:03 PM
It's fun to win 4 games in a row and look at the standings and see we're only 10 back and start to be somewhat optimistic. Is there a chance? Yeah. Is it likely though, no. We'll see where they're at in a week or two. The rest of this month is tough minus the last series with Pitt and potentially the series before it with the Marlins (who the Reds struggled with). We'll see where they stand after they play San Diego, the Cubs, the Brewers and the Braves.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-09-2007, 08:26 AM
To have a chance they would have to sweep out the Cubs and Brewers.

Stranger things have happened.

Strikes Out Looking
08-09-2007, 08:33 AM
I believe it's possible. I don't believe it will happen. However, I do think the NL Central Division race will go down to the end--the four teams currently in front of the Reds have problems almost as big as the problems Redszoner's have noted about the Reds.

Roy Tucker
08-09-2007, 08:54 AM
Maybe not the Reds, but collapses happen. A list from 2005 where the White Sox narrowly missed an all-time gag.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/pete_mcentegart/09/23/ten.spot/index.html

Despite a 15-game lead on Aug. 1 and a 9 1/2-game edge as recently as Sept. 7, the limping White Sox now lead the surging Indians by just 1 1/2 games in the AL Central. If Chicago can't hold on, it would rank as one of the worst collapses in baseball history. Here's the list that the White Sox desperately want to avoid cracking:

1. 1978 Red Sox: With 32 games to play, Boston had a 7 1/2 game lead over the Bronx Zoo Yankees, who as late as July 19 sat in fourth place, a whopping 14 games back. But the Red Sox lost 14 of their first 17 games in September, including a brutal four-game sweep at Fenway Park (cumulative score: 42-9) by the Yanks that has been dubbed the Boston Massacre. Boston did win its last eight games to tie the Yanks and force a one-game playoff. That only served to prolong the agony for Sox fans as Yanks shortstop Bucky Dent became a curse word throughout New England after his game-turning homer.

2. 1964 Phillies: The granddaddy of all collapses. The Phils led the Cardinals by 6 1/2 games with just 12 to play, at which point Philadelphia was returning home to open a seven-game homestand. The mayor of the city was among the 2,000 fans who greeted the Phillies at the airport and the team printed World Series tickets. The Phillies promptly dropped their next 10 games. Manager Gene Mauch felt the pressure so much that he twice started the team's two best pitchers, Jim Bunning and Chris Short, on just two days rest; Philly lost all four games. The Phils did win their final two games, but by then the Cards had passed them by and Philadelphia settled for a second-place tie with the Reds, one painful game back.

3. 1969 Cubs: On Aug. 14, the Cubs led the Cards by 8 1/2 games and the soon-to-be-Miracle Mets by 9 1/2. Just 13 days later, the Cubs' lead over the Mets was down to just two. The Amazins' won going away, by a remarkable eight games. The Mets did get red-hot, finishing on a 38-11 burst and going 23-7 in September. Still, the Cubs could only blame themselves after losing eight straight, 11 of 12 and 14 of 20 down the stretch. Manager Leo Durocher ran his veteran squad into the ground, as 38-year-old Ernie Banks played in 155 of 162 games and catcher Randy Hundley donned the gear in 151 contests. That proved especially costly at steamy Wrigley Field, which then hosted only day games.

4. 1995 Angels: California (remember them?) had a 13-game advantage on Aug. 2 and still led the Mariners and Rangers by 11 games on Aug. 9, then went 12-27 the rest of the way. Included in that skid was a seven-game losing streak as the offense headed south of the border. The Angels did regroup enough to win their final five games to force a one-game playoff with the Mariners, only to be shut down by Seattle ace Randy Johnson.

5. 1987 Blue Jays: When the Blue Jays won the first three games of a four-game set against the Tigers, they held a 3 1/2-game lead with seven games left. Toronto would not win again. The final series of the season was a rematch in Detroit. The Tigers won all three games by one run, the finale a 1-0 shutout behind Frank Tanana to clinch the AL East by two games. Detroit was led by pitcher Doyle Alexander, a midseason acquisition from the Braves who went 9-0 down the stretch. All it cost the Tigers was an unproven farmhand named John Smoltz.


6. 1938 Pirates: Pittsburgh led the second-place Cubs by seven games on Sept. 4 behind stars such as Arky Vaughan and brothers Paul "Big Poison" and Lloyd "Little Poison" Waner. A mid-September hurricane, however, canceled play for four days, allowing a tired Chicago club to regroup. The Cubs took the lead with a three-game sweep of the Pirates at Wrigley Field in late September. Chicago won the second game on player-manager Gabby Hartnettls famous "homer in the gloamin'" just before the umpires were set to call the game on account of darkness.

7. 1934 Giants: New York earned the dubious distinction of becoming the first team to enter September with a seven-game lead and lose the pennant. The Giants played .500 ball down the stretch, but the Gashouse Gang Cardinals finished with a 33-12 burst behind the pitching of brothers Dizzy and Daffy Dean. This is also the year cited as the true start of the Giants-Dodgers rivalry, after New York manager Bill Terry was asked to assess the Dodgers in spring training and answered, "Brooklyn? Is Brooklyn still in the league?" The Dodgers finished sixth, but beat the Giants two out of the three on the final weekend as the Cards won by two games.

8. 1951 Dodgers: After winning the first game of a doubleheader against the second-place Giants on Aug. 11, Brooklyn led by 13 1/2 games. That wouldn't be enough despite the fact that the Dodgers went a respectable 26-22 from then on. The red-hot Giants, however, closed with a 37-7 run that included a 16-game winning streak. Both teams won on the season's final day to force a three-game playoff, which the Giants won on Bobby Thomson's Shot Heard Round The World.

9. 1993 Giants: In the last season before the introduction of the wild card, San Francisco led the Braves in the NL West by nine games on Aug. 11. The Giants quickly squandered the lead with a 6-15 stretch that included eight straight losses. Still, San Francisco battled back, finishing with a 14-3 run and winning 103 games in all. The teams were tied heading into the season finale, but while the Braves beat the Rockies, the Dodgers spoiled things for their ancient rivals with a 12-1 victory.

10. 1942 Dodgers: On Aug. 15, the young Bums of 23-year-olds Pee Wee Reese and Pete Reiser owned a 9 1/2-game lead over the Cardinals. From there, Brooklyn didn't collapse so much as it was passed by a speeding bullet. The Cardinals went 43-8 during the pennant drive, including winning 12 of their final 13 games to hold off a late charge by the game Dodgers. In fact, Brooklyn ended up 104-50 in one of the hardest-luck second-place finishes in baseball history.

redsmetz
08-09-2007, 08:57 AM
I agree collapses are possible and have happened - there have been teams nearly as far back as we are now who have won - but the huge caveat is that there are numerous teams between us and first place. It would have to be failure at Herculean rates across the board with so many dominoes needing to fall. Of course, there's a slight mathematical change, but it's not far from "slim to none" (what was it someone noted? - one tenth of one percent? - that is a chance, but not much of one. But then again, lightening strikes occasionally. Usually that stings a good bit though.

cumberlandreds
08-09-2007, 09:00 AM
The Reds would have to go on a ten or twelve game wiining streak to get back in it. They have shown now inclination at all this of doing that. So I would say they have no chance of winning the division. I hate to say it but watch out for the Cardinals. With the Brewers freefalling and the Cubs struggling without Soriano, the Cards are positioned to vault over top of these two with just a modest winning streak.

registerthis
08-09-2007, 10:03 AM
I still think the Reds will finish last in the division.

Yeah, they're pretty good at packing it in early.

BRM
08-09-2007, 10:15 AM
All this talk about "still being in it" just means the front office is less likely to make the hard decisions this winter and try to really improve the club. The Reds will continue to nickel and dime their way towards .500, which is good enough to be "in it" in the Central.

redsrule2500
08-09-2007, 10:37 AM
No. But St. Louis does. Once again, this division is pathetic, and the Brewers are fading fast.

I still think the Reds will finish last in the division.

And here's Mr. Positive!

I think there is definitely a chance, however small it may be.

westofyou
08-09-2007, 11:08 AM
Last Month in the Central

CENTRAL W L PCT GB HOME ROAD
Milwaukee 49 39 .557 - 430 388
Milwaukee 60 55 .522 - 548 547
--- ---
118 159

CENTRAL W L PCT GB HOME ROAD
Chicago Cubs 44 43 .506 4.5 396 368
Chicago Cubs 58 55 .513 1 517 473
--- ---
121 105

CENTRAL W L PCT GB HOME ROAD
St. Louis 52 59 .468 6 481 584
St. Louis 40 45 .471 7.5 368 432
--- ---
113 148

CENTRAL W L PCT GB HOME ROAD
Pittsburgh 40 48 .455 9 367 427
Pittsburgh 45 65 .409 12.5 466 560
--- ---
99 143

CENTRAL W L PCT GB HOME ROAD
Houston 51 63 .447 8.5 518 582
Houston 39 50 .438 10.5 402 441
--- ---
116 141

CENTRAL W L PCT GB HOME ROAD
Cincinnati 49 64 .434 10 524 579
Cincinnati 36 52 .409 13 418 454
--- ---
106 125

Chip R
08-09-2007, 11:29 AM
Just think, if the Reds win every game from here on out, they will win 98 games.

cincrazy
08-09-2007, 02:01 PM
Just think, if the Reds win every game from here on out, they will win 98 games.

:pray:

vaticanplum
08-09-2007, 08:09 PM
No, but there's every kind of indication that this division is winnable, virtually every year; and there are all kinds of indications that this team can't seize that opportunity.

And the Reds aren't even alone. This division is unbelievable. The only reason a team wins it every year is because MLB makes them. Not one team in the NL Central has any concept of timing or opportunity. My friend the Cubs fan was bemoaning their recent performance today, while taking comfort in the fact that Milwaukee is falling apart, and I told him that if any team in this division were offered filet mignon served off a stripper's cleavage, it'd go running in the other direction. It's pathetic. It's the most unprofessional atheletic group of professional athletes I've ever seen.

Ltlabner
08-09-2007, 08:11 PM
...and I told him that if any team in this division were offered filet mignon served off a stripper's cleavage, it'd go running in the other direction. It's pathetic.

yuuuuuuuummmm.........filet mignon.

Falls City Beer
08-09-2007, 08:21 PM
And the Reds aren't even alone. This division is unbelievable. The only reason a team wins it every year is because MLB makes them. Not one team in the NL Central has any concept of timing or opportunity. My friend the Cubs fan was bemoaning their recent performance today, while taking comfort in the fact that Milwaukee is falling apart, and I told him that if any team in this division were offered filet mignon served off a stripper's cleavage, it'd go running in the other direction. It's pathetic. It's the most unprofessional atheletic group of professional athletes I've ever seen.

Whoa.

vaticanplum
08-09-2007, 08:59 PM
Whoa.

I'm getting cranky and intolerant in my old age. If I were the parent of any NL Central team, I'd have kicked the crap out of it and shipped it to military school by now.

nate
08-09-2007, 09:10 PM
And the Reds aren't even alone. This division is unbelievable. The only reason a team wins it every year is because MLB makes them. Not one team in the NL Central has any concept of timing or opportunity. My friend the Cubs fan was bemoaning their recent performance today, while taking comfort in the fact that Milwaukee is falling apart, and I told him that if any team in this division were offered filet mignon served off a stripper's cleavage, it'd go running in the other direction. It's pathetic. It's the most unprofessional atheletic group of professional athletes I've ever seen.

The AL East guys are really into that.

GAC
08-09-2007, 09:23 PM
I'm getting cranky and intolerant in my old age.

Ok. I here you using this "old age" term in reference to yourself all the time. Are you even 30 yet? If that is considered old, then I'm well past my expiration date! http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/merv/groucho.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

vaticanplum
08-09-2007, 09:38 PM
Ok. I here you using this "old age" term in reference to yourself all the time. Are you even 30 yet? If that is considered old, then I'm well past my expiration date! http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/merv/groucho.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

This team is aging us quickly, GAC.

RFS62
08-09-2007, 10:32 PM
This team is aging us quickly, GAC.



GAC has socks older than you, Vaticanplum.

KronoRed
08-09-2007, 11:11 PM
This team is aging us quickly, GAC.

Don't let them, I'm not letting a bad baseball team drive me to drink :D

GAC
08-10-2007, 09:30 AM
This team is aging us quickly, GAC.

Not me. I give that credit to my teenagers. :thumbup:

I've been an avid baseball fan for over 40 years. Now playing the game has definitely taken it's toll on my body. I "Ryan Freel'd" it for many years. My knees are about shot, and so is my back. But I never get worrisome or overly upset at the game.... even with it's the Reds current "predicament".

Ya can't change it... so why fret over it? ;)

Marc D
08-10-2007, 10:39 AM
I'm getting cranky and intolerant in my old age. If I were the parent of any NL Central team, I'd have kicked the crap out of it and shipped it to military school by now.


With the Finklestien kid ?

Chip R
08-10-2007, 10:41 AM
With the Finklestien kid ?

:lol:

DoogMinAmo
08-23-2007, 06:59 PM
Of the 36 games remaining on the Reds' schedule, 18 are against the Brewers, Cards and Cubs. 20 of 36 are home games, where the Reds are playing better this year.

Cubs have 3 @ STL and 3 vs. MIL
STL has 3 @ MIL and 3 vs. CHC
MIL has 3 @ CHC and 3 vs. STL

The Reds currently sit 9 games back.

The magic number for elimination sits at 28 games.

The final series of the year is agains the Cubs at the GABP.

Although improbable, the Reds are very much in the hunt, and for the most extent control their own destiny.

How much of you has a glint of optimism at their chances?

What would you do if they made it?

nate
08-23-2007, 07:04 PM
I'm not optimistic about their chances because they're going to by a lot of Central teams playing each other in the same time frame.

However, if they were to put together some serious baseball history, I wouldn't gloat to some of the less optimistic folks around here.

Nope, wouldn't do it!

Probably...

TeamBoone
08-23-2007, 07:11 PM
Thanks, Doog, for bringing this up.

I brought it up earlier in the month (in a game thread). I reminded everyone who kept saying the season is lost, the Reds are out of it (at the time), that they still had 30 games WITHIN THE DIVISION.

I took some heat for it, basically saying I was in la la land if I thought the Reds were still in it. Well, now it's a couple weeks later, and I still say they could pull off a miracle if they continue to play good ball and the BP shows up when the experimental starters melt down, as they have recently.

Sure, I suppose there's just as good a chance that it won't happen, but you know what? At least they have a chance, and we shouldn't give up on them prematurely.

I don't want to look at the guys down in the minors as long as there is hope. We can do that later in September when we'll have a better idea as to whether they're in it or not in it. There's also spring training which is designed for evaluating the young guys.

Right now, I want the Reds to keep on winning... if for no other reason than to prove the "know it alls" wrong.

DoogMinAmo
08-23-2007, 07:30 PM
I'm not optimistic about their chances because they're going to by a lot of Central teams playing each other in the same time frame.

However, if they were to put together some serious baseball history, I wouldn't gloat to some of the less optimistic folks around here.

Nope, wouldn't do it!

Probably...

It is conceivable that getting hot at the right time, while everyone is beating up on each other, could produce the improbable. Couple more tidbits:

To reach .500, the reds would need to go 25-11 here on out, .694 ball

Since Mac was hired, the Reds are 25-19, .568 ball.

DoogMinAmo
08-23-2007, 11:05 PM
Update: :)

.500: 24-11, .686

Mac: 26-19, .578

fearofpopvol1
08-23-2007, 11:14 PM
It has been fun to watch as of late and to be cautiously optimistic about the season. The starters have to go later in games though. The bullpen cannot continue to pitch all these innings (pitched over 14 innings in the last 3 games and the starting pitching only has 2 quality starts in the last 15ish games).

On the bright side, the Cards, Cubs and Astros all lost tonight while Milwaukee was dormant.

The Reds did not fair very well against the Marlins earlier in the season, but hopefully they turn things around for this upcoming series.

cincrazy
08-23-2007, 11:22 PM
I want to be as optimistic as the rest of you, but it took us several weeks just to catch the ASTROS, let alone any of the three teams ahead of us. It's going to take an epic choke job by three different teams, and an incredible run by us, just to give us a chance. I'm sorry... but unless we cut it to 5 games or below in early September, I won't believe that we have a prayer.

VR
08-23-2007, 11:30 PM
8.5 out on August 23rd?

Yes, a chance. I'm in.

Sea Ray
08-23-2007, 11:38 PM
Very, very slim to none chance, but enjoy the good baseball while it lasts...

Cyclone792
08-23-2007, 11:38 PM
8.5 games out on its own footing isn't a terrible mountain to climb over. The real problem is the fact that in addition to making up that much ground on the division leader, the Reds would have to climb over three teams just to win the NL Central.

It's likely that whoever wins the NL Central will probably conclude the last 5-6 weeks of the season by playing .530 to .540 ball or so, and unfortunately it'll probably be the Cubs. That means you're probably looking at the NL Central winner taking the division with anywhere from 82-85 wins, and the Reds won't win that many games. The only way I see the Reds taking the NL Central is if the division is won by a sub .500 team, and unfortunately the odds of all three teams falling in the toilet for that to happen are just exceptionally low.

oregonred
08-24-2007, 12:41 AM
If the sad sack Cards make the playoffs with 80-82 wins again this year I think I'm going to vomit... The Cubs ought to be s minimum of 10 games in front of those jokers.

I think they are now 27-19 after firing Narron. (From 30-51 to 57-70?)

KronoRed
08-24-2007, 01:41 AM
Odds are running junk out in the 3-5 rotation spots will catch up to us soon.

Not having 90 losses is my goal for a "successful" season ;)

redsrule2500
08-24-2007, 01:44 AM
Odds are running junk out in the 3-5 rotation spots will catch up to us soon.

Not having 90 losses is my goal for a "successful" season ;)

Well, seeing we were below .400 in July, I would say so.

fearofpopvol1
08-24-2007, 01:49 AM
I feel like Belisle may be the wild card. Harang and Arroyo are capable of pitching well. Livingston and the Lizard I think are trainwrecks on the mound for Cincy. However, Belisle is a guy that actually has the stuff to be successful whereas Livingston nor the Lizard do. If the Reds can consistently get pretty good starts from those 3 and then hope that the other 2 can have a good start here or there, that might be enough. Obviously the bullpen has to continue this streak they're on and part of that is not being overused which means the starting pitching has to be more effective.

TeamBoone
08-24-2007, 02:34 AM
I feel like Belisle may be the wild card. Harang and Arroyo are capable of pitching well. Livingston and the Lizard I think are trainwrecks on the mound for Cincy. However, Belisle is a guy that actually has the stuff to be successful whereas Livingston nor the Lizard do.

I really don't know about Elizardo. I thought he did a decent job for the first half last year; not sure what happened after that. I guess he was hurt. Even now, he shows glimpses of effectiveness, even tonight... but then seems to go down hill in a hurry.

I think Livingston has potential. He's a rookie and, IMHO, deserves a pass until he's had more time to develop.

camisadelgolf
08-24-2007, 04:39 AM
If the Reds win the division this year, I'll donate $1,000 to RedsZone (in yearly installments).

Roy Tucker
08-24-2007, 08:35 AM
I never give up hope on the Reds until they are mathematically eliminated.

Now, depending on their record, that might be a very slender sliver of hope that I don't tell anyone about. It may be a completely unbelievable scheme based on a house of cards. But it is hope nonetheless.

For the first time since about the second week of the season, I looked at the standings last night. 8.5 games out and they passed the Astros for 4th place. The likelihood of them winning the NL Central is probably about 1%, but it does happen.

The problem is, if the Reds are beating the teams ahead of them (Brewers/Cubs/Astros), the other contenders have the opportunity to gain ground as well.

I think it is very unlikely the Reds win the NL Central, but I'm an idiot fan and won't give up hope till they have that asterisk by their name in the standings saying "eliminated from post-season play". It's the 12 yr. old boy in me.

RANDY IN INDY
08-24-2007, 08:41 AM
Same here, Roy.

cumberlandreds
08-24-2007, 08:50 AM
The Reds are in fourth place now. They jumped over the Astros last night. The next seven games are against Florida and Pittsburgh who have a worse record than the Reds. Take 6 of 7 from those two. Hey you never know...................but it's nice to dream about.

mbgrayson
08-24-2007, 09:25 AM
According to the Baseball Prospectus postseason odds report (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php), the Reds chances of making the playoffs are .22594 of 1 %. (Almost 1/4 of 1%).

NL Central odds:
Cubs: 52.8
Brewers: 38.6
Cards: 12.3
Reds: 0.2

Even after winning these last few series, the Reds only have 57 wins. Only the Giants and Pirates have less wins in the National League. The Reds first half put us in a DEEP hole.

Still, it is fun to watch them win. Wait till next year(If we can get some more pitching)!

nate
08-24-2007, 09:34 AM
According to the Baseball Prospectus postseason odds report (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php), the Reds chances of making the playoffs are .22594 of 1 %. (Almost 1/4 of 1%).

NL Central odds:
Cubs: 52.8
Brewers: 38.6
Cards: 12.3
Reds: 0.2

Even after winning these last few series, the Reds only have 57 wins. Only the Giants and Pirates have less wins in the National League. The Reds first half put us in a DEEP hole.

Still, it is fun to watch them win. Wait till next year(If we can get some more pitching)!

If we could only splice our first half from last year onto our second half from this year. We'd be (math in head) 67-62.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-24-2007, 10:22 AM
If they can make up 3-4 games this week (they would need to run off 6-7 in a row probably) and get to within 5 games by September, they have a shot.

oregonred
08-24-2007, 10:58 AM
If we could only splice our first half from last year onto our second half from this year. We'd be (math in head) 67-62.

April - June 30, 2006: 44-36
July 1, 2007 - Aug 24, 2007: 26-19

70-55. In this division that's a juggernaut.

Maybe we can print a banner or something of the such at GABP ;)

flyer85
08-24-2007, 11:08 AM
Reds playoff chances still hovering around 0.2% ... but there is a chance.

fearofpopvol1
08-24-2007, 12:18 PM
I really don't know about Elizardo. I thought he did a decent job for the first half last year; not sure what happened after that. I guess he was hurt. Even now, he shows glimpses of effectiveness, even tonight... but then seems to go down hill in a hurry.

I think Livingston has potential. He's a rookie and, IMHO, deserves a pass until he's had more time to develop.

I don't know. I think any success that either have shown has been more luck based. Both pitchers have weak fastballs and very much rely on the location of their pitches. Neither have putaway pitches and neither strike out a lot of batters. I think Lizard ideally would be a decent long reliever. Livingston has shown more promise to me than the Lizard has and he's a lefty so I could be okay with him being a 5th starter.

camisadelgolf
08-24-2007, 02:22 PM
Not too long ago, the Reds chances were at 0.1%, and they've since doubled. With each win, there's more reason for hope. The odds are incredibly slim, yes, but I've not lost all hope just yet.

coachw513
08-24-2007, 03:23 PM
Not too long ago, the Reds chances were at 0.1%, and they've since doubled. With each win, there's more reason for hope.

If there has ever been a greater statement of optimism ever uttered, I haven't seen it...that's classic :thumbup:

This is why sports matter to us...if we had a .2% chance of getting a job, getting a raise or getting "some", we'd be miserable and depressed...

But here, in the world of sports, we see hope, marvelous insanely improbable hope and we cling to it like a lion to its dinner...

Personally, if the Padres DFA Peavy and we pick him up I like our chances a little better :D

nate
08-24-2007, 03:32 PM
Personally, if the Padres DFA Peavy and we pick him up I like our chances a little better :D

Yeah, but by winning more game, we're losing our place in line to get him!

wheels
08-24-2007, 04:55 PM
I want that first draft pick dadgummit.

All of this winning is really ticking me off.

Unassisted
08-24-2007, 05:19 PM
I decided to see what would happen if the Reds won, but not swept, each of their remaining series for this year. That's been their recent pattern in series, so it's not an outlandish prediction.

They have 10 3-game series remaining and one 4-gamer. Winning the 10 series 2-1 and the other series 3-1 would give them a 23-11 record for that stretch. Added to the current 57-70, they would finish at 80-81. A 1-game below .500 record would be good enough for 3rd place if the other NL Central teams continue at their current pace.

Matt700wlw
08-24-2007, 05:22 PM
I doubt they have a shot...but 6 more with the Cubs, 6 more with the Brewers, and 6 more with the Cardinals....

They may be able to at least make it interesting....

DoogMinAmo
08-24-2007, 05:22 PM
I decided to see what would happen if the Reds won, but not swept, each of their remaining series for this year. That's been their recent pattern in series, so it's not an outlandish prediction.

They have 10 3-game series remaining and one 4-gamer. Winning the 10 series 2-1 and the other series 3-1 would give them a 23-11 record for that stretch. Added to the current 57-70, they would finish at 80-81. A 1-game below .500 record would be good enough for 3rd place if the other NL Central teams continue at their current pace.


Do they just not play that last game then?

Edskin
08-24-2007, 05:36 PM
I have NEVER in my lifetime enjoyed a Reds season less than I've enjoyed this one. Yes, we've had worse teams, but this has been a miserable year in terms of my enjoyment level. For the first time since it's inception, I cancelled my MLB TV pass early this year. First time since 1998 that I haven't had all Reds TV games at my fingertips for an entire season.

For whatever reason, this team "lost" me long ago. I am sometimes even embarrassed-- normally I'm a guy who NEVER goes to sleep until the Reds game ends-- no matter how late. Yet, this summer, there have been times when I don't even check to see if the Reds won until the next EVENING.

Having said all that...............I must admit to doing a little "math" the past 24 hours, concoting how many we'd have to win to get in.

My best guess is that we'd need 84 wins. That's 27-7 the rest of the way.

I mean, C'mon....

The 8.5 games back isn't THAT daunting. But when you factor in THREE teams ahead of us and the fact that we are 57-70 for the season.........not happening. I will never rain on a fellow fan's parade-- so if this latest run "jolts" you, then more power to you.

Here's a stat I'd love to know:

Through 127 games.....has any team in MLB history that stood 13 games below .500 at that point ever made the post-season? I would guess no. My next question would be....how far below .500 was the record through 127 games?

westofyou
08-24-2007, 08:28 PM
I have NEVER in my lifetime enjoyed a Reds season less than I've enjoyed this one. Yes, we've had worse teams, but this has been a miserable year in terms of my enjoyment level.


1989 sucked, sucked, sucked sucked.

Larkin getting injured, a losing team, Pete freaking Rose...

1989 sucked... this is a cakewalk compared to that.

Strikes Out Looking
08-24-2007, 09:46 PM
1989 sucked, sucked, sucked sucked.

Larkin getting injured, a losing team, Pete freaking Rose...

1989 sucked... this is a cakewalk compared to that.

1982 was bad. From the best to the worst in one Dick Wagnerian off-season.

Wheelhouse
08-24-2007, 10:02 PM
Have there been any indications that this team is capable of sustained winning? If not, then there's your answer.

This team is not capable of sustained winning, I don't care what the metrics are. They lack a "factor x," which in mathematics is a variable that augments behavior, but is not defined in an equation. The reductive metricians will never understand this.

westofyou
08-24-2007, 10:11 PM
1982 was bad. From the best to the worst in one Dick Wagnerian off-season.

Horrible... but I left that summer and moved west. Ended the season watching Joe Morgan circle the bases as a Giant.

That sucked too.

fearofpopvol1
08-24-2007, 10:12 PM
Tonight's win was important.

Coming off winning the last 3, it was important to keep the win streak alive. Harang needed a good outing (which he had) and the bullpen needed a rest (which they got). Who knows what will happen on Sunday, but our chances aren't bad for the game tomorrow.

I've watched the majority of the games this season (almost religiously) and this little tear the team is on has been impressive. They're playing like a team, they're finding ways to win and they're doing it often times by coming back from being down. The team looks calm and poised. They don't panic when they get down.

It's been fun to watch. Hopefully they can keep this up.

DoogMinAmo
08-24-2007, 10:13 PM
So "clutch" is a variable? :evil:

Update:

.500: 23-11, .676

Mac: 27-19, .587

fearofpopvol1
08-24-2007, 10:31 PM
So "clutch" is a variable? :evil:

Update:

.500: 23-11, .676

Mac: 27-19, .587

Almost at the point where they can afford to play .666 ball, which I think is more reasonable.

vaticanplum
08-25-2007, 11:30 AM
I have no hope of the Reds winning the division this year. I've never felt that way before -- as long as it's mathematically possible (and 8.5 games back in a crappy division is certainly mathematically possible), I hold out hope. I don't this year. Honestly, even though it would always thrill me to see the Reds in the playoffs, I think part of my feeling that way has to do with feeling sour about the team this year. I'm soured on what i perceive as a sense of resignedness with the front office and the team, I'm very soured on the public attitude toward the team and its players, I'm sick of having to defend the few viable parts of this team. This is in very start contrast to last year's team, which was a very easy team to love and the season was such a fun ride even though I knew their playoff chances weren't that much better. Certainly, things have gotten better since Mackanin came in, but it almost feels like it was too late.

So I really don't hold out any playoff hopes for the Reds this year. The playoffs are always exciting, yes, but the playoffs are a lot more exciting when they involve genuinely good teams. (I'd rather the Reds be a great team playing in a tough division and miss out on the playoffs than squeak into the playoffs as a mediocre team in a terrible division. I mean that.) This year's Reds are simply not a very good team. They weren't last year either, but they played like they were. However, I do hold out hope for the Reds serving as spoilers to the Cubs somehow, and since I've become so accustomed to the Reds sitting at home during the playoffs after almost eight losing seasons, that's become quite an attractive second-best option.

Falls City Beer
08-25-2007, 11:33 AM
Races this tight are won by the team with the best pen. That's the Cardinals.

You're right VP--this is a bad, bad ballclub playing a decent stretch of baseball. Nothing more.

redsrule2500
08-25-2007, 11:48 AM
Races this tight are won by the team with the best pen. That's the Cardinals.

You're right VP--this is a bad, bad ballclub playing a decent stretch of baseball. Nothing more.

I disagree completely. When you look at the stats of each individual player, there is no reason we shouldn't be at least a .500 club.

Stormy
08-25-2007, 12:05 PM
You're right VP--this is a bad, bad ballclub playing a decent stretch of baseball. Nothing more.

I actually think this is a promising young offensive ballclub, which is being undermined by it's pervasive pitching deficiencies. We need 3/5 of a rotation, and several stalwart bullpen arms. If we could obtain several of those additions via trade and/or FA without moving Dunn or a key youngster, we'd definitely have a chance of entering 2008 as the equal of the Cubs, Brewers or Cards.

Hopefully, this team has learned the value of extending Adam Dunn for 4-5 additional years, if they aren't blown away by an offer during his option year. Complement Dunn with Hamilton, Phillips, Keppinger, EdE, Votto, Bruce (eventually), and you have the makings of a pretty solid, and diverse offense (minus a RH power bat). So, the focus in our every transaction, acquisition, budgetary allocation, and trade should be in light of landing impact rotation and bullpen help... serious help, as this offense, and improving defense, should take care of itself.

Patrick Bateman
08-25-2007, 12:07 PM
I disagree completely. When you look at the stats of each individual player, there is no reason we shouldn't be at least a .500 club.

You must not be looking at the pitching stats.

oregonred
08-25-2007, 12:14 PM
I actually think this is a promising young offensive ballclub, which is being undermined by it's pervasive pitching deficiencies. We need 3/5 of a rotation, and several stalwart bullpen arms. If we could obtain several of those additions via trade and/or FA without moving Dunn or a key youngster, we'd definitely have a chance of entering 2008 as the equal of the Cubs, Brewers or Cards.

Hopefully, this team has learned the value of extending Adam Dunn for 4-5 additional years, if they aren't blown away by an offer during his option year. Complement Dunn with Hamilton, Phillips, Keppinger, EdE, Votto, Bruce (eventually), and you have the makings of a pretty solid, and diverse offense (minus a RH power bat). So, the focus in our every transaction, acquisition, budgetary allocation, and trade should be in light of landing impact rotation and bullpen help... serious help, as this offense, and improving defense, should take care of itself.

Wow, that's almost a downright bullish analysis from the great Stormy ;)

Falls City Beer
08-25-2007, 12:24 PM
I actually think this is a promising young offensive ballclub, which is being undermined by it's pervasive pitching deficiencies. We need 3/5 of a rotation, and several stalwart bullpen arms. If we could obtain several of those additions via trade and/or FA without moving Dunn or a key youngster, we'd definitely have a chance of entering 2008 as the equal of the Cubs, Brewers or Cards.

Hopefully, this team has learned the value of extending Adam Dunn for 4-5 additional years, if they aren't blown away by an offer during his option year. Complement Dunn with Hamilton, Phillips, Keppinger, EdE, Votto, Bruce (eventually), and you have the makings of a pretty solid, and diverse offense (minus a RH power bat). So, the focus in our every transaction, acquisition, budgetary allocation, and trade should be in light of landing impact rotation and bullpen help... serious help, as this offense, and improving defense, should take care of itself.

I doubt Dunn is a Red after June/July of 2008.

Sea Ray
08-25-2007, 01:03 PM
This club does not have the starting pitching to make a run this year but it isn't much worse than the other teams in this division. The hole they dug in the first half is just too great. If we were playing half seasons like the minors then I'd say they've got a great chance. I think the Reds will benefit from Sept roster expansion 'cause it'll keep 'em from burning through its pen. We all know that this pen will have to pitch a ton of innings in Sept this year.

LoganBuck
08-25-2007, 01:33 PM
According to the Baseball Prospectus postseason odds report (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php), the Reds chances of making the playoffs are .22594 of 1 %. (Almost 1/4 of 1%).

NL Central odds:
Cubs: 52.8
Brewers: 38.6
Cards: 12.3
Reds: 0.2

Even after winning these last few series, the Reds only have 57 wins. Only the Giants and Pirates have less wins in the National League. The Reds first half put us in a DEEP hole.

Still, it is fun to watch them win. Wait till next year(If we can get some more pitching)!

So you are saying there is a chance!

Unassisted
08-25-2007, 02:00 PM
Do they just not play that last game then?

I assume it wouldn't be played unless it factors into the standings.

mth123
08-25-2007, 02:21 PM
I actually think this is a promising young offensive ballclub, which is being undermined by it's pervasive pitching deficiencies. We need 3/5 of a rotation, and several stalwart bullpen arms. If we could obtain several of those additions via trade and/or FA without moving Dunn or a key youngster, we'd definitely have a chance of entering 2008 as the equal of the Cubs, Brewers or Cards.

Hopefully, this team has learned the value of extending Adam Dunn for 4-5 additional years, if they aren't blown away by an offer during his option year. Complement Dunn with Hamilton, Phillips, Keppinger, EdE, Votto, Bruce (eventually), and you have the makings of a pretty solid, and diverse offense (minus a RH power bat). So, the focus in our every transaction, acquisition, budgetary allocation, and trade should be in light of landing impact rotation and bullpen help... serious help, as this offense, and improving defense, should take care of itself.

Agree completely Stormy, but I've come to the realization that some of those young cheap offensive players may need to be dealt for that pitching you speak of. I could see the team acquiring or producing the impact bullpen help needed. The impact rotation help is most likely a jackpot hit with Bailey, Cueto or maybe Maloney. I think that is a lot to count on.

Caveat Emperor
08-25-2007, 02:31 PM
We need 3/5 of a rotation, and several stalwart bullpen arms.

You could copy and paste this statement and post it on any of almost 10-15 message boards that following losing ballclubs and it would be true.

And, if you look at the FA list, you can see this team isn't getting any better anytime soon unless some creativity occurs. Its no longer a matter of money, because even if the Reds had unlimited financial resources they still couldn't spend their way out of this problem given the state of the talent pool.

fearofpopvol1
08-25-2007, 02:58 PM
You could copy and paste this statement and post it on any of almost 10-15 message boards that following losing ballclubs and it would be true.

And, if you look at the FA list, you can see this team isn't getting any better anytime soon unless some creativity occurs. Its no longer a matter of money, because even if the Reds had unlimited financial resources they still couldn't spend their way out of this problem given the state of the talent pool.

As I said earlier, when looking at that list, I still see options in that pool that would be an upgrade over what we currently have. Many of those starters would be upgrades over Belisle, Livingston and Ramirez.

OnBaseMachine
08-25-2007, 03:17 PM
Races this tight are won by the team with the best pen. That's the Cardinals.

You're right VP--this is a bad, bad ballclub playing a decent stretch of baseball. Nothing more.

The Cardinals suck.

Reds 617 RS/685 RA/Proj. record of 58-70.

Cardinals 559 RS/631 RA/Proj. record of 56-69

The Cardinals suck. They have been extremely lucky this year, so please stop polluting the Reds board with Cardinals posts.

Falls City Beer
08-25-2007, 03:31 PM
The Cardinals suck.

Reds 617 RS/685 RA/Proj. record of 58-70.

Cardinals 559 RS/631 RA/Proj. record of 56-69

The Cardinals suck. They have been extremely lucky this year, so please stop polluting the Reds board with Cardinals posts.

No team in this division is good, including the Cardinals--but I think the Cards are the best of the worst.

Patrick Bateman
08-25-2007, 03:34 PM
The Cardinals suck.

Reds 617 RS/685 RA/Proj. record of 58-70.

Cardinals 559 RS/631 RA/Proj. record of 56-69

The Cardinals suck. They have been extremely lucky this year, so please stop polluting the Reds board with Cardinals posts.

One thing to remember is that The Cards have been playing better lately. They have stunk basically all season and were pretty lucky for a while, but lately, their Pythag has been taking some steps forward as the Cards have beaten around some opponents lately.

If they keep it up, they may not need to rely on their early season luck to make the playoffs. I'm not saying they are a good team, but they have turned things around at the right time.

All season I have said that I wasn't worried about the Cards because they simply were not good enough and were surviving on luck, but they have turned things up a notch lately. I'm pretty pissed at the thought of them squeaking in to the playoffs again this season, but it's become a possible scenario.

OnBaseMachine
08-25-2007, 03:38 PM
No team in this division is good, including the Cardinals--but I think the Cards are the best of the worst.

Fine. Then I think the Reds are the best team in the division because afterall, our pyth. record is better than the Cardinals.

mbgrayson
08-25-2007, 03:45 PM
Fine. Then I think the Reds are the best team in the division because afterall, our pyth. record is better than the Cardinals.

Then we should be a lock for the Pythagorean playoffs!:ughmamoru

cincrazy
08-26-2007, 12:34 AM
7.5 back. Honestly, this defies logic. Every night I proclaim on this thread "People, we don't have a chance, get real." Then every night, they knock another game off of the deficit. This is bordering on the absurd.

fearofpopvol1
08-26-2007, 12:47 AM
Crazy, isn't it? I really felt like tonight was an important game because I think Belisle is going to make or break things for the rest of this season. I don't have high hopes for tomorrow, but it'd be great if the Reds can pull it out.

I think this upcoming series with the Pirates is going to be telling. We play them for 4 games (1 is a double header). The Brewers and Cubs play each other at the same time. Depending on tomorrow, it's probably best the Brewers win 2 and the Cubs win 1. The Pirates are going to see all of the Reds best starting pitching so you've gotta at least feel like the Reds have a shot. As I said, I think this upcoming week is huge. If things go our way, we really could make a run in September.

Really, we just need to keep winning and all the teams ahead of us need to be losing.

red-in-la
08-26-2007, 12:59 AM
Crazy, isn't it? I really felt like tonight was an important game because I think Belisle is going to make or break things for the rest of this season. I don't have high hopes for tomorrow, but it'd be great if the Reds can pull it out.

I think this upcoming series with the Pirates is going to be telling. We play them for 4 games (1 is a double header). The Brewers and Cubs play each other at the same time. Depending on tomorrow, it's probably best the Brewers win 2 and the Cubs win 1. The Pirates are going to see all of the Reds best starting pitching so you've gotta at least feel like the Reds have a shot. As I said, I think this upcoming week is huge. If things go our way, we really could make a run in September.

Really, we just need to keep winning and all the teams ahead of us need to be losing.

Boy, that sounds easy! :D

fearofpopvol1
08-26-2007, 01:03 AM
Boy, that sounds easy! :D

I know it's crazy, but stranger thing have happened. Who would've seen the Reds go 9-3 in their last 12 games (all of which have come against legitimate contenders except for the Marlins)?

They have been playing some pretty exceptional baseball.

red-in-la
08-26-2007, 01:12 AM
I was just impressed with how you condensed the issue. I sat here watching the Arizona-Chicago game because I do agree with you.

We all would like to see the Reds make a push. If they could be as good this September as they were bad last year, who knows.

I cannot recall the Reds EVER being in a division this bad.....so who knows.....

red-in-la
08-26-2007, 01:12 AM
I was just impressed with how you condensed the issue. I sat here watching the Arizona-Chicago game because I do agree with you.

We all would like to see the Reds make a push. If they could be as good this September as they were bad last year, who knows.

I cannot recall the Reds EVER being in a division this bad.....so who knows.....

Caveat Emperor
08-26-2007, 01:18 AM
7.5 back. Honestly, this defies logic. Every night I proclaim on this thread "People, we don't have a chance, get real." Then every night, they knock another game off of the deficit. This is bordering on the absurd.


They may be 7.5 back, but they're also trotting guys like Stanton and Saarloos out on a nightly basis. The harsh reality is that they only have 2 starting pitchers worth anything and 2, maybe 3, bullpen pitchers that are worth anything.

You're not going to ride that to any kind of postseason birth, no matter how badly you wish for it to be true.

Eventually this House of Cards is going to come crumbling down.

fearofpopvol1
08-26-2007, 01:19 AM
I was just impressed with how you condensed the issue. I sat here watching the Arizona-Chicago game because I do agree with you.

We all would like to see the Reds make a push. If they could be as good this September as they were bad last year, who knows.

I cannot recall the Reds EVER being in a division this bad.....so who knows.....

Clearly, it's a HUGE longshot. HUGE. That's why I think this upcoming week is going to be big. If the Reds can continue to win (and against the Pirates no less) and the Cubs and Brewers beat each other up fairly, it is possible that the Reds could be 5 games out going into September (while having 6 remaining games each against the Cards/Cubs/Brewers). The fate will actually be in their hands at that point.

It is a longshot and it is crazy to ponder, but it really may be possible.

red-in-la
08-26-2007, 01:23 AM
They may be 7.5 back, but they're also trotting guys like Stanton and Saarloos out on a nightly basis. The harsh reality is that they only have 2 starting pitchers worth anything and 2, maybe 3, bullpen pitchers that are worth anything.

You're not going to ride that to any kind of postseason birth, no matter how badly you wish for it to be true.

Eventually this House of Cards is going to come crumbling down.

This whole silliness is not about what the Reds don't have.....it's about what the Cubs, Brewers and Cards don't have.

fearofpopvol1
08-26-2007, 01:31 AM
The Baseball Tonight guys on ESPN were even commenting how good the Reds have been playing and how they're only 6 games behind Milwaukee and that anything can happen.

Also, you gotta love Brandon Phillips' optimism.

From Reds.com

Having fun: The numbers say Phillips' optimism is somewhat misplaced.

Sure, going into Saturday's game, the Reds were a National League-best 27-19 since Mackanin took over as Reds manager on July 3. Sure, they'd moved up two places in the NL Central, from sixth to fourth place. Sure, they'd won four in a row.

But they still had three teams to climb over to reach first place in their division and seven to climb into the lead for the Wild Card spot.

"We can't ever give up, no matter how many games we're out," Phillips said. "Just like last year, anything can happen. We should have made [the playoffs] last year, and right now, I think we can still make it this year. If we can keep worrying about ourselves, anything can happen."

"We should have been like that all season, but right now, we are," Phillips said. "We just think about what we can be right now. Honestly, I feel like we are a winning team regardless of what our record is. We're just looking at it different. Pete's got us doing the right thing. Pat Kelly is doing his job as the bench coach as well. We're just out there having fun. That's basically it."

toledodan
08-26-2007, 03:38 AM
i agree if they can get it down to 5 games before going into september they can contol their own fate. while a complete longshot its amazing they have closed the lead this much. i think our interm manager may be earning himself a full time gig. if he gets this team close to .500 i think he deserves a shot next season.

camisadelgolf
08-26-2007, 05:33 AM
They may be 7.5 back, but they're also trotting guys like Stanton and Saarloos out on a nightly basis.

Overall, I agree with everything you just said, but the beauty of their recent success is that it's not Stanton and Saarloos who are trotting out there every night. They're being tossed out there in mop-up roles while Burton, Bray, and Weathers are successfully handling the close games. If only Narron had shared Mackanin's bullpen strategy . . .

mbgrayson
08-26-2007, 09:31 AM
According to the Baseball Prospectus postseason odds report (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php), the Reds chance of making the postseason is now .50587%. That is more than double what it was a couple days ago. And if half of one percent sounds like a longshot, it is. But it is a much better chance than winning the lottery.

Our odds are even better to make the Pythagorean Playoffs! Those aren't as much fun to watch: they take place inside some guys computer....

37red
08-26-2007, 10:28 AM
They're teasing us, it's tormenting to get our hopes up like this and then it will all crash and burn. I hope I'm wrong of course, but this is just not possible.

Hap
08-26-2007, 11:46 AM
I will now point out the obvious.

The final three games of the season are against the Cubs in Cincy. If the Reds are within three games by September 28, they have a chance. That means they have to pick up 4.5 games within the next 33 days (not at all impossible).

DoogMinAmo
08-26-2007, 11:58 AM
I will now point out the obvious.

The final three games of the season are against the Cubs in Cincy. If the Reds are within three games by September 28, they have a chance. That means they have to pick up 4.5 games within the next 33 days (not at all impossible).

If the Reds are able to knock off 4.5+ games in the next 33, some key points for that final series:

1. The return of playoff atmosphere to Cincinnati missing since the one embarrassing game in 99 against the Mets. I remember how electric that was, and miss it dearly.

2. A predominantly pro-Reds crowd late in the season when the Cubs are in town. Anyone else get annoyed/ embarrassed by the traveling Cubs fans?

3. Sticking it to the Cubs one more time. Someone has to be the laughingstock of baseball, right?

4. Having an entire city on the edges of their seats on the outcome of a mere three games out of 162.

Anyone else really, really, really pulling for the Reds?

VR
08-26-2007, 12:06 PM
According to the Baseball Prospectus postseason odds report (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_odds.php), the Reds chance of making the postseason is now .50587%. That is more than double what it was a couple days ago. And if half of one percent sounds like a longshot, it is. But it is a much better chance than winning the lottery.

Our odds are even better to make the Pythagorean Playoffs! Those aren't as much fun to watch: they take place inside some guys computer....

And there you have the obvious logic. At the pace of doubling their chances every two days....their probability will be 64% in two weeks!

PuffyPig
08-26-2007, 12:14 PM
I cannot recall the Reds EVER being in a division this bad.....so who knows.....

Last year, the Cards won the division (and the World Series) with a worse record than the Cub's current record.

fearofpopvol1
08-26-2007, 12:20 PM
If the Reds are able to knock off 4.5+ games in the next 33, some key points for that final series:

1. The return of playoff atmosphere to Cincinnati missing since the one embarrassing game in 99 against the Mets. I remember how electric that was, and miss it dearly.

2. A predominantly pro-Reds crowd late in the season when the Cubs are in town. Anyone else get annoyed/ embarrassed by the traveling Cubs fans?

3. Sticking it to the Cubs one more time. Someone has to be the laughingstock of baseball, right?

4. Having an entire city on the edges of their seats on the outcome of a mere three games out of 162.

Anyone else really, really, really pulling for the Reds?

This of course assumes that Milwaukee and The Cards aren't at the top of the division. I'm starting to think more and more that Milwaukee may be finished, but I'm not at all convinced that the Cards won't be right in the mix.

mth123
08-26-2007, 01:00 PM
If the Reds are able to knock off 4.5+ games in the next 33, some key points for that final series:

1. The return of playoff atmosphere to Cincinnati missing since the one embarrassing game in 99 against the Mets. I remember how electric that was, and miss it dearly.

2. A predominantly pro-Reds crowd late in the season when the Cubs are in town. Anyone else get annoyed/ embarrassed by the traveling Cubs fans?

3. Sticking it to the Cubs one more time. Someone has to be the laughingstock of baseball, right?

4. Having an entire city on the edges of their seats on the outcome of a mere three games out of 162.

Anyone else really, really, really pulling for the Reds?

And to get to that point you may have to go into the series with Belisle, Ramirez and Shearn as the guys to get you into the postseason.

The Reds have played better lately which was predictable for a number of reasons:

1. Pressure has been off.
2. Mgmt has finally gotten around to giving better players bigger roles - thanks in no small part to trades of Lohse, Moeller and Conine and season ending injuries to Milton, Castro and Freel.
3. Bray coming back helps.
4. See number 1.

I'm glad they are playing better it makes the games more fun. I might actually get excited about this so called "chance" they have this year if a couple of the above named starters show signs of stepping forward and the dynamic due of Kirk Saarloos and Mike Stanton never take the mound again. I'm still skeptical.

Big Klu
08-26-2007, 03:38 PM
And there you have the obvious logic. At the pace of doubling their chances every two days....their probability will be 64% in two weeks!

And in three weeks, their probability will be 512%! :beerme:

vaticanplum
08-26-2007, 03:45 PM
Last year, the Cards won the division (and the World Series) with a worse record than the Cub's current record.

Do you mean winning percentage? That's really splitting hairs. The Cubs' current winning percentage is .516; the Cards ended last year with a winning percentage of .512.

Whatever, the division was, is and continues to be pretty uniformly bad.

camisadelgolf
08-26-2007, 03:48 PM
Whatever, the division was, is and continues to be pretty uniformly bad.

It's one of the few things on which everyone from RedsZone can agree.

redsrule2500
08-26-2007, 04:00 PM
Do you mean winning percentage? That's really splitting hairs. The Cubs' current winning percentage is .516; the Cards ended last year with a winning percentage of .512.

Whatever, the division was, is and continues to be pretty uniformly bad.

You sure it's not just an even distribution of wealth among the SIX teams? After all, we play each other more than any other team in MLB...

corkedbat
08-26-2007, 04:02 PM
I've said consistently that this season was over, but after today, for the first time I'm willing to concede that they have a sliver if a chance (but still not much of one).

I think that this is the pivital week of the season. If they can take 3 of 4 from the Bucs (they have to dominate Pittsburgh if they're gonna contend) and take at least 2 of three from the Cards (because of the hole they've dug they must win series from STL, CHI & MIL) they have a chance.

5-2 or better this week and they will be in the thick of it. 4-3 or worse and they're toast.

red-in-la
08-26-2007, 04:05 PM
You sure it's not just an even distribution of wealth among the SIX teams? After all, we play each other more than any other team in MLB...

Father looks at his son's report and sees that there are 5 F's and a D. He asks his son about it.

The son's response: "Looks like I am spending too much time on one subject."

I am not sure where you would look up the winning percentage of the entire division for this year and last year to compare.....but I do not recall last year's divsion being as collectively bad as this year.

vaticanplum
08-26-2007, 04:06 PM
You sure it's not just an even distribution of wealth among the SIX teams? After all, we play each other more than any other team in MLB...

Yes, I am. I've though about that at times, but there's always a team in the division (usually the Pirates, last year the Cubs) that is so bad as to be a near-negatable influence spread out over five other teams. Mostly, though, I'm talking about the pure quality of baseball in the division. The way the teams tend to get killed by other teams outside the division and in the American League. The quality of baseball that I see when watching an NL Central game and an AL Central, East, NL East or West game. The general pitching stats across the board.

The AL West teams (a four-team division) do not have particularly higher records than other teams. Which goes to the fact that it's also not a particularly good division.

redsrule2500
08-26-2007, 04:06 PM
Well we have enough games left against the Cubs to pretty much make up the games behind. Then we've also got a healty portion of cards and brewers left as well.

if we can win about 80% of those, and play decent against others, definitely have a chance.

Cyclone792
08-26-2007, 04:26 PM
I've said consistently that this season was over, but after today, for the first time I'm willing to concede that they have a sliver if a chance (but still not much of one).

I think that this is the pivital week of the season. If they can take 3 of 4 from the Bucs (they have to dominate Pittsburgh if they're gonna contend) and take at least 2 of three from the Cards (because of the hole they've dug they must win series from STL, CHI & MIL) they have a chance.

5-2 or better this week and they will be in the thick of it. 4-3 or worse and they're toast.

Yep, my thinking is 5-2 is a must for this road trip, including taking two from the Cardinals. While the team is playing good right now, that's still a tall order to accomplish. But hey some little chance is better than no chance and it's still fun to talk about.

Tuesday could be an important day as the doubleheader gives the Reds a chance to make up ground on everyone quick by winning both games; it also has the chance to really hurt the Reds if they lose both games.

Today's games so far ...

St. Louis is beating Atlanta 4-1 in the 8th inning. The Braves are running out of outs, and unfortunately it looks like the Cardinals are going to win.

San Francisco has Lincecum on the mound right now against the Brewers, and the Giants lead 1-0 in the 2nd inning.

The Cubs play in Arizona, and that game hasn't started yet.

harangatang
08-26-2007, 04:29 PM
If the Reds can get somehow get to .500, sure it's totally possible they could take the Central.

Sea Ray
08-26-2007, 04:31 PM
I know it's crazy, but stranger thing have happened. Who would've seen the Reds go 9-3 in their last 12 games (all of which have come against legitimate contenders except for the Marlins)?

They have been playing some pretty exceptional baseball.

What team has ever won after being 17 games back?

Sea Ray
08-26-2007, 04:34 PM
The Reds have played better lately which was predictable for a number of reasons



I sure we wish we could hit against Brave/Marlin pitching all year. That's been a huge reason for this 6 game winning streak. Our guys think it doesn't matter who we throw out there, our hitters will out score the other team. That confidence is likely to wane as they face "major league" pitching

Falls City Beer
08-26-2007, 04:34 PM
Yep, my thinking is 5-2 is a must for this road trip, including taking two from the Cardinals. While the team is playing good right now, that's still a tall order to accomplish. But hey some little chance is better than no chance and it's still fun to talk about.

Tuesday could be an important day as the doubleheader gives the Reds a chance to make up ground on everyone quick by winning both games; it also has the chance to really hurt the Reds if they lose both games.

Today's games so far ...

St. Louis is beating Atlanta 4-1 in the 8th inning. The Braves are running out of outs, and unfortunately it looks like the Cardinals are going to win.

San Francisco has Lincecum on the mound right now against the Brewers, and the Giants lead 1-0 in the 2nd inning.

The Cubs play in Arizona, and that game hasn't started yet.

I'm just not sure there's a team that's going to do much against St. Louis's bullpen. And Jocketty may have saved their season with the very quiet and very sly acquisition of Pineiro--who very well might pull a Bronson Arroyo circa 2006 for the rest of the season--to go along with their Harang, Adam Wainwright.

It's going to be awful, awful tough to pick them off. About the only team capable of holding them off might be the Cubs.

OnBaseMachine
08-26-2007, 04:36 PM
I'm just not sure there's a team that's going to do much against St. Louis's bullpen. And Jocketty may have saved their season with the very quiet and very sly acquisition of Pineiro--who very well might pull a Bronson Arroyo circa 2006 for the rest of the season--to go along with their Harang, Adam Wainwright.

It's going to be awful, awful tough to pick them off. About the only team capable of holding them off might be the Cubs.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

The Cardinals stink. What part of that don't you understand? The Reds actually have a better run differential.

Comparing Wainwright to Aaron Harang is absolutely hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.

Falls City Beer
08-26-2007, 04:38 PM
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

The Cardinals stink. What part of that don't you understand? The Reds actually have a better run differential.

Comparing Wainwright to Aaron Harang is absolutely hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.

In the last month Wainwright has been pitching circles around Harang.

OnBaseMachine
08-26-2007, 04:39 PM
In the last month Wainwright has been pitching circles around Harang.

Oh ok. I forgot that one month made a whole career.

Tom Shearn is the next Greg Maddux, afterall he did pitch well today. And we all know that one start means everything, folks.

Falls City Beer
08-26-2007, 04:40 PM
Oh ok. I forgot that one month made a whole career.

At this point, and in this discussion, "right now" is all that matters. This isn't "who's had the better career" discussion--this is "who's poised to pull away" discussion.

LoganBuck
08-26-2007, 04:40 PM
They have to get another pitcher if they even want to entertain this thought don't they? Who has cleared waivers or been DFA'd recently?

OnBaseMachine
08-26-2007, 04:42 PM
Joel Pineiro has a .990 OPS against with the Cardinals and now he's the next Bronson Arroyo.

:bowrofl::bowrofl::bowrofl::bowrofl::bowrofl:

Matt700wlw
08-26-2007, 04:43 PM
Another thread turned into a Cardinal kiss job...

OnBaseMachine
08-26-2007, 04:44 PM
Another thread turned into a Cardinal kiss job...

Yep. It's getting real old. ORG has become nearly unreadable because of it.

Strikes Out Looking
08-26-2007, 04:53 PM
Can they win? Maybe.
Will they win? My head says no, my heart says yes. But since six weeks ago, we were all losing interest and hoping not to lose 100 games, I'm along for the ride. Six in a row is fun, I've forgot the feeling!

mth123
08-26-2007, 05:27 PM
Another thread turned into a Cardinal kiss job...


No one needs me to defend them, but you can't talk about the NL Central race w/o talking about the Cardinals.

Personally, I think the Cubs have the best pitching and should get a huge lift when Soriano returns. I'd say they are the favorite.

Matt700wlw
08-26-2007, 05:28 PM
No one needs me to defend them, but you can't talk about the NL Central race w/o talking about the Cardinals.

Personally, I think the Cubs have the best pitching and should get a huge lift when Soriano returns. I'd say they are the favorite.

Nothing wrong with talking about the Cards in the race...because they are

However, they get talked about on here like they're the greatest team in baseball.

They're not...


Of course, I said that last year too....and look what happened...

Ron Madden
08-26-2007, 05:38 PM
Whether you like the Cards or not, any team with thier sights set on winning this division must beat St. Louis.

We still have a glimmer of hope. :)

mth123
08-26-2007, 05:39 PM
Nothing wrong with talking about the Cards in the race...because they are

However, they get talked about on here like they're the greatest team in baseball.

They're not...


Of course, I said that last year too....and look what happened...

I've seen the threads too, but telling you why a particular team is a particular poster's choice to win the division in a thread about whether the Reds have any chance to win said division seems appropriate to me. I don't particularly agree, but I don't see any reason to attack. The poster gave his opinion and told everyone why he thinks so. Post logical reasons why that is wrong, don't attack.

MWM
08-26-2007, 05:41 PM
Come on, FCB.

Harang in August:

IP - 28.2
H - 25
BB - 3
K - 28
WHIP - 0.98

Wainright in August:

IP - 29
H - 25
BB - 9
K - 27
WHIP - 1.17

That's your definition of pitching circles around? Get real.

The difference between the two in August is that Wainright has given up 2 HRs to Harang's 9, which is a total anomaly for Harang. But Harang allowed fewer baserunners and struck out more hitters. Who would I rather have starting a game right now between the two? Harang in a laugher. And I'm a big fan of Wainright. I think he's going to be a solid starting pitcher for years. But right now, yes RIGHT NOW, I'd much rather have Harang.

jojo
08-26-2007, 05:44 PM
I disagree completely. When you look at the stats of each individual player, there is no reason we shouldn't be at least a .500 club.

The Reds actual record matches exactly their pythag record.

OnBaseMachine
08-26-2007, 05:50 PM
Come on, FCB.

Harang in August:

IP - 28.2
H - 25
BB - 3
K - 28
WHIP - 0.98

Wainright in August:

IP - 29
H - 25
BB - 9
K - 27
WHIP - 1.17

That's your definition of pitching circles around? Get real.

The difference between the two in August is that Wainright has given up 2 HRs to Harang's 9, which is a total anomaly for Harang. But Harang allowed fewer baserunners and struck out more hitters. Who would I rather have starting a game right now between the two? Harang in a laugher. And I'm a big fan of Wainright. I think he's going to be a solid starting pitcher for years. But right now, yes RIGHT NOW, I'd much rather have Harang.


Facts are not allowed in this discussion. The Cardinals are the greatest team in the world and anyone who argues against this is just silly.

Falls City Beer
08-26-2007, 06:00 PM
Come on, FCB.

Harang in August:

IP - 28.2
H - 25
BB - 3
K - 28
WHIP - 0.98

Wainright in August:

IP - 29
H - 25
BB - 9
K - 27
WHIP - 1.17

That's your definition of pitching circles around? Get real.

The difference between the two in August is that Wainright has given up 2 HRs to Harang's 9, which is a total anomaly for Harang. But Harang allowed fewer baserunners and struck out more hitters. Who would I rather have starting a game right now between the two? Harang in a laugher. And I'm a big fan of Wainright. I think he's going to be a solid starting pitcher for years. But right now, yes RIGHT NOW, I'd much rather have Harang.

Harang giving up dingers in bunches is the opposite of an anomaly. He's a very home run prone pitcher.

OnBaseMachine
08-26-2007, 06:04 PM
And Wainwright puts a bunch of baserunners on.

RBA
08-26-2007, 06:23 PM
Brewers lost again thanks to Rich "the Great" Aurilia!

coachw513
08-26-2007, 06:23 PM
FWIW, Brewers give another one away in SF, just losing 5-4...

Arizona has overcome a 3 run first and an inside the park HR by DLee to lead the Cubs 5-4 in the top of the 6th...

Just sayin'...

fearofpopvol1
08-26-2007, 06:26 PM
Yep. Cards won though unfortunately.

Astros beat the Pirates today cooling them off. Advantage or disadvantage going into the series with the Reds you think?

Hoosier Red
08-26-2007, 06:54 PM
Well in order to win 82 games, the Reds need to go 22-10 over the rest of the season(.688)
Since Mackanin has taken over the Reds are 29-19(.604)

If the Reds win their next 5 games, their winning percentage since MACk took over will surpass the winning percentage they will need to play for the remainder of the season.

Stupid math.

Cyclone792
08-26-2007, 07:07 PM
The Diamondbacks still lead the Cubs 5-4 with the game heading into the bottom of the 8th inning. It'd be nice to see Arizona score a run or three and widen their lead for the 9th.

Patrick Bateman
08-26-2007, 07:18 PM
Anyone here like Whitesnake?

PuffyPig
08-26-2007, 07:22 PM
And Jocketty may have saved their season with the very quiet and very sly acquisition of Pineiro--who very well might pull a Bronson Arroyo circa 2006 for the rest of the season--to go along with their Harang, Adam Wainwright.




I guess you haven't heard...Pineiro stinks, even with the Cards.

That 5+ DIPS ERA (with the Cards) doesn't lie, nor do the 6 HR's allowed in about 30 innings.

He doesn't strike out guys and gives up the long ball. Only his lack of walks (well below his career average) has saved him from being Kip Wells, who's actauuly a better pitcher.

Wells, Pineiro, Looper and Reyes are all high 4 -5 ERA guys, with Reyes having potential to be better.

Cyclone792
08-26-2007, 07:24 PM
Arizona was able to get runners on 1st and 2nd in the bottom of the 8th, but couldn't push a run across as they hang on to a 5-4 lead. It's now in the top of the 9th and Arizona has Valverde on the mound to try to slam the door.

MWM
08-26-2007, 07:26 PM
Harang giving up dingers in bunches is the opposite of an anomaly. He's a very home run prone pitcher.

So because of that you still say Wainright is still "pitching circles around" Harang?

jojo
08-26-2007, 07:26 PM
I guess you haven't heard...Pineiro stinks, even with the Cards.

That 5+ DIPS ERA (with the Cards) doesn't lie, nor do the 6 HR's allowed in about 30 innings.

He doesn't strike out guys and gives up the long ball. Only his lack of walks (well below his career average) has saved him from being Kip Wells, who's actauuly a better pitcher.

Wells, Pineiro, Looper and Reyes are all high 4 -5 ERA guys, with Reyes having potential to be better.

And the big success story in the pen-Ryan Franklin- basically is milk that is past date and waiting to turn....

Razor Shines
08-26-2007, 07:28 PM
Valverde in the process of blowing a save.

OnBaseMachine
08-26-2007, 07:30 PM
The Cardinals are an old team with a bare farm system and their GM is unhappy and will most likely leave after this season. Sorry FCB, but your Cards are finished. Luckily for them Pedro Martinez and El Duque got hurt last year...

PuffyPig
08-26-2007, 07:31 PM
And the big success story in the pen-Ryan Franklin- basically is milk that is past date and waiting to turn....

His 5.23 ERA in August suggests it has already turned.

westofyou
08-26-2007, 07:34 PM
So because of that you still say Wainright is still "pitching circles around" Harang?

The birds on the bats sway his opinion.. every time.

Razor Shines
08-26-2007, 07:35 PM
Strike 'em out throw 'em out DP for the D-Backs. 2 down in the 9th.

fearofpopvol1
08-26-2007, 07:40 PM
Cubs lose! The Reds are 6.5 out now.

Razor Shines
08-26-2007, 07:40 PM
6.5 back.

Tom Servo
08-26-2007, 07:41 PM
We're getting there.

Cyclone792
08-26-2007, 07:41 PM
Things are beginning to tighten up now in the division. The Reds are 6.5 games behind the Cubs, 5 games behind the Brewers, and 4.5 games behind the Cardinals.

Razor Shines
08-26-2007, 07:44 PM
Even if they are just "installing Glade Air fresheners around the house" it's still a hell of a lot more fun to be 6.5 out rather than 10-12 out.

HumnHilghtFreel
08-26-2007, 07:44 PM
I hate getting my hopes up, but it's been a fun run since Pete has been at the helm. At least I have something to watch for now, even if it is a longshot.

:beerme: here's to somewhat meaningful baseball games in the last month!

GAC
08-26-2007, 07:55 PM
One has to admit, even though their chances are slim, it is providing some excitment. They are not the same ballclub we were witnessing earlier. And some of the younger players have been a big part of it this last few weeks.

But this is simply one horrendous division. Of course anything can happen in those short series called the post-season; but the pitching just isn't there for any of these NL Central teams IMO.

oneupper
08-26-2007, 08:02 PM
Right now, the probabilty of the team finishing at .500 is about 5%.
That said, .500 could be enough to win this division, if the REDs and others second division clubs (Pirates Astros) help out.

REDS get a double dose of lefties on Tuesday with Gorzolanny and Maholm. Righties Snell on Wednesday and Matt Morris on Thursday.

Lets hope this bubble doesn't burst too quickly.

TeamBoone
08-26-2007, 08:36 PM
Both Harang and Arroyo will pitch against Pittsburgh. Will they pitch in St. Louis? (sorry, I don't know which games they pitch so I couldn't figure it out)

Always Red
08-26-2007, 08:42 PM
6.5 back.

Well blow me down.

I'd have never thought, in a million years this would be the case back on Memorial Day weekend, when the Reds were dead, dead, dead.

Baseball is a funny game, and I have learned, yet again, another lesson.

Go Reds!

MWM
08-26-2007, 09:28 PM
The Reds are closer to first place in their division than the Yankess to their's.

mth123
08-26-2007, 09:30 PM
The Reds are closer to first place in their division than the Yankess to their's.

Maybe Clemens will demand a trade to Cincy to be in a playoff race.

KronoRed
08-26-2007, 09:33 PM
Maybe Clemens will demand a trade to Cincy to be in a playoff race.

Don't want him.

vaticanplum
08-26-2007, 10:27 PM
The Reds are closer to first place in their division than the Yankess to their's.

But there are only two teams who have any hope of winning that division. That makes a big difference.

The Yankees will win the AL East. So sayeth i, this 26th day of August (i've been saying since the All-Star break, actually).

Unassisted
08-26-2007, 11:48 PM
I decided to see what would happen if the Reds won, but not swept, each of their remaining series for this year. That's been their recent pattern in series, so it's not an outlandish prediction.

They have 10 3-game series remaining and one 4-gamer. Winning the 10 series 2-1 and the other series 3-1 would give them a 23-11 record for that stretch. Added to the current 57-70, they would finish at 80-81. A 1-game below .500 record would be good enough for 3rd place if the other NL Central teams continue at their current pace.

When I made this projection last week, I overlooked the double-header in Pittsburgh this week. That makes that series a 4-gamer. Now that the Reds won all 3 games in the first of their remaining 3-game series and assuming they go 3-1 against PIT instead of 2-1, this projection method has them finishing 1 game over .500.

Cyclone792
08-27-2007, 02:49 AM
Here's some useless info I looked up for the heck of it. Since the Reds last made the playoffs in 1995, I was curious what their pennant race hopes looked like at the close of play on August 27th in each season since. Everybody in the NL Central is off today so the standings at the close of play today will remain the same.

Here's each season since 1995 (1999 is in bold because the Reds did qualify for a one-game playoff that season for the NL Wildcard) ...

1996 Reds: 65-66, 3rd place NL Central, 5.0 games behind in division, 6.0 games behind in wildcard
1997 Reds: 58-73, 4th place NL Central, 11.5 games behind in division, 19.0 games behind in wildcard
1998 Reds: 62-72, 6th place NL Central, 21.0 games behind in division, 11.0 games behind in wildcard
1999 Reds: 75-52, 2nd place NL Central, 0.5 games behind in division, 3.0 games behind in wildcard
2000 Reds: 64-65, 2nd place NL Central, 8.5 games behind in division, 12.5 games behind in wildcard
2001 Reds: 53-77, 5th place NL Central, 22.0 games behind in division, 19.5 games behind in wildcard
2002 Reds: 65-66, 3rd place NL Central, 7.5 games behind in division, 10.5 games behind in wildcard
2003 Reds: 58-74, 5th place NL Central, 12.0 games behind in division, 12.0 games behind in wildcard
2004 Reds: 61-66, 4th place NL Central, 22.5 games behind in division, 9.5 games behind in wildcard
2005 Reds: 61-68, 5th place NL Central, 20.5 games behind in division, 8.5 games behind in wildcard
2006 Reds: 67-64, 2nd place NL Central, 3.0 games behind in division, 0.5 games ahead in wildcard
2007 Reds: 60-70, 4th place NL Central, 6.5 games behind in division, 10.5 games behind in wildcard* (as of August 26th)

So there you have it ... 2007 marks the 12th season since the Reds last made the playoffs in 1995.

Two seasons - 1999 and 2006 - had the team square in the thick of a playoff race at the close of play on August 27th. In 1999, the Reds ultimately lost a one-game playoff to the Mets, and in 2006, the Reds finished 80-82, in 3rd place in the NL Central and 3.5 games behind the division winning Cardinals. At the risk of invoking bad memories, it should be said that at this time in 2006 the Reds were in the midst of a painful and long west coast trip that ultimately derailed much of their hopes of reaching the playoffs.

The 1996 Reds have been the 3rd closest playoff race since 1995. The 1996 squad finished the season at an even 81-81, 7.0 games behind the division winning Cardinals and in 3rd place in the NL Central. They also finished 9.0 games behind the NL Wildcard Los Angeles Dodgers.

The 4th closest Reds playoff race since 1995? Well it just happens to be this season in 2007 as the Reds trail the division leader by 6.5 games (and wildcard leader by 10.5 games), albeit being in 4th place in the division. It's a feat that is amazing and sad at the same time ...

The 2002 season was the 5th closest race as the Reds were 7.5 games behind in the NL Central while in 3rd place and 10.5 games behind in the NL Wildcard. In 2002, the St. Louis Cardinals were a signicantly better team than any 2007 NL Central team, they got hot in September, and they ran away with the NL Central crown at 97-65, 19 games ahead of a Reds team that finished the season at 78-84.

redsmetz
08-27-2007, 05:43 AM
Cyclone, funny you should do this because I just came from looking at last year's races to figure out something similar. I did see that last year this time, the Twins were in third, 5.0 games behind. They won the division. That said, a game and a half (5.0 out vs. 6.5 out) could be a killer and our chances remain slim, but stranger things have happened.

Ltlabner
08-27-2007, 07:04 AM
While I think they have as much chance of winning the division as I do going out on a date with Tiffany Amber Theisen tonight, it's definatley A LOT more fun to listen/watch games now. Life is always better when your ballteam is at least portraying themselves as a faximile of a real baseball team.

Raisor
08-27-2007, 07:44 AM
While I think they have as much chance of winning the division as I do going out on a date with Tiffany Amber Theisen tonight

You have zero chance, because I'm going out with TAT tonight.

Don't tell the wife.

LoganBuck
08-27-2007, 07:51 AM
T A-T, now or then?

I ask once more doesn't this team need to add a pitcher to even entertain the idea of winning the division? Is there a pitcher out there that has been DFA'd or has cleared waivers and is eligible to be traded that can provide an upgrade? If they actually make the playoffs do you use a rotation of Harang, Arroyo, pray for rain?

Edskin
08-27-2007, 08:00 AM
Here's what I've decided.......for my own sanity.

I'm going to continue to virtually "ignore" the Reds during this series against Pittsburgh. If we come out of this series with three or more wins and close the gap to 5 games or less, then they will officially have my attention. For now, I am choosing to view this as a nice run in an otherwsise horrible season.

Ltlabner
08-27-2007, 08:11 AM
T A-T, now or then?

Yes.

:pimp:

Strikes Out Looking
08-27-2007, 08:20 AM
I prefer being in a pennant race, no matter how slim the chances are of winning it, to be mathematically eliminated. This is fun (I was out all weekend and kept sneaking to my car to check the XM to see what was going on).

And here are my rambling thoughts of today: Ironically, it seems "The Trade" of 2006 is one of the major factors of the Reds play this last week. The bullpen now has more than one somewhat dependable arm in it, which has to be helping. I don't know which of the teams above the Reds are the "favorites" to win the division as they all have blemishes and warts, just like the Reds. Hopefully, the Reds can get to 5 back by labor day and go from there. This ride has gone from a car crash to a roller coaster in a blink of an eye.

RedsBaron
08-27-2007, 08:30 AM
T A-T, now or then?



She doesn't use the "Amber" now, so he must be going out with the high school version.

Roy Tucker
08-27-2007, 08:46 AM
I'm not going to talk or think about it.

When I played basketball, I learned to let a hot shooting streak ride and not think about it too much. As soon as I began to think (always a dangerous thing), I starting heaving up bricks.

It was fun to be at the stadium yesterday. Nice hot day, lots of sunshine (got some sunburn), no blaring music and only the organ, red Sunday unies, enthusiastic crowd, my wife actually talked to me, we ran the bases after the game, and the Reds won.

wheels
08-27-2007, 09:43 AM
I'm not going to talk or think about it.

When I played basketball, I learned to let a hot shooting streak ride and not think about it too much. As soon as I began to think (always a dangerous thing), I starting heaving up bricks.

It was fun to be at the stadium yesterday. Nice hot day, lots of sunshine (got some sunburn), no blaring music and only the organ, red Sunday unies, enthusiastic crowd, my wife actually talked to me, we ran the bases after the game, and the Reds won.


You just did.

Consider it officially jinxed. I guess it was fun while it lasted.:p:

PuffyPig
08-27-2007, 10:28 AM
Here's what I've decided.......for my own sanity.

I'm going to continue to virtually "ignore" the Reds during this series against Pittsburgh. If we come out of this series with three or more wins and close the gap to 5 games or less, then they will officially have my attention. For now, I am choosing to view this as a nice run in an otherwsise horrible season.


A frontrunner huh?:D

Though it's impossible to be a frontrunner and a Reds fan at the same time.

It's sad that you chosse to ignore the Reds during the last quarter season, when they have compiled the NL's best record. You've missed alot of great baseball. Sure they won't likely make the playoffs (that's easy to see), but you've been missing alot of nice performances from guys like Phillips,Hamilton, Keppinger, Griffey and Dunn.

membengal
08-27-2007, 10:29 AM
Most fun I've ever had following a 60-70 team.

God bless the dysfunctional teams in the NL Central. Every one.

westofyou
08-27-2007, 10:31 AM
You've missed alot of great baseball.

Yep, it's been a nicer August then last year, much more enjoyable.

Ltlabner
08-27-2007, 10:32 AM
Most fun I've ever had following a 60-70 team.

God bless the dysfunctional teams in the NL Central. Every one.

Amen.

It would suck to be the Toronto and basically no matter what you do always be chasing the Bo Sox and Yankees.

Sea Ray
08-27-2007, 11:25 AM
If the Reds are in it then you have to say the same about the Colorado Rockies...

JaxRed
08-27-2007, 11:27 AM
"Here's what I've decided.......for my own sanity"

Hasn't that ship sailed? ;)

nate
08-27-2007, 11:52 AM
How about "we're more in it than Tampa Bay"?

I'd consider it a moral victory to finish with a better record than the Cardinals!

cincrazy
08-27-2007, 12:17 PM
If we lose every game the rest of the season, that would put us at 102 losses, which would break the franchise record for most losses in a season by one game. Amazing thing is, for a good while, I thought we were an absolute shoe in to lose 102 games or so. Now we'd have to lose 32 STRAIGHT to make that happen!!!! That speaks volumes to the job Mackanin has done.

LoganBuck
08-27-2007, 12:37 PM
ESPNews is now showing the Reds in the standings that they scroll on the bottomline! That hasn't happened since April.

fearofpopvol1
08-27-2007, 12:44 PM
Here's some useless info I looked up for the heck of it. Since the Reds last made the playoffs in 1995, I was curious what their pennant race hopes looked like at the close of play on August 27th in each season since. Everybody in the NL Central is off today so the standings at the close of play today will remain the same.

Here's each season since 1995 (1999 is in bold because the Reds did qualify for a one-game playoff that season for the NL Wildcard) ...

1996 Reds: 65-66, 3rd place NL Central, 5.0 games behind in division, 6.0 games behind in wildcard
1997 Reds: 58-73, 4th place NL Central, 11.5 games behind in division, 19.0 games behind in wildcard
1998 Reds: 62-72, 6th place NL Central, 21.0 games behind in division, 11.0 games behind in wildcard
1999 Reds: 75-52, 2nd place NL Central, 0.5 games behind in division, 3.0 games behind in wildcard
2000 Reds: 64-65, 2nd place NL Central, 8.5 games behind in division, 12.5 games behind in wildcard
2001 Reds: 53-77, 5th place NL Central, 22.0 games behind in division, 19.5 games behind in wildcard
2002 Reds: 65-66, 3rd place NL Central, 7.5 games behind in division, 10.5 games behind in wildcard
2003 Reds: 58-74, 5th place NL Central, 12.0 games behind in division, 12.0 games behind in wildcard
2004 Reds: 61-66, 4th place NL Central, 22.5 games behind in division, 9.5 games behind in wildcard
2005 Reds: 61-68, 5th place NL Central, 20.5 games behind in division, 8.5 games behind in wildcard
2006 Reds: 67-64, 2nd place NL Central, 3.0 games behind in division, 0.5 games ahead in wildcard
2007 Reds: 60-70, 4th place NL Central, 6.5 games behind in division, 10.5 games behind in wildcard* (as of August 26th)

So there you have it ... 2007 marks the 12th season since the Reds last made the playoffs in 1995.

Two seasons - 1999 and 2006 - had the team square in the thick of a playoff race at the close of play on August 27th. In 1999, the Reds ultimately lost a one-game playoff to the Mets, and in 2006, the Reds finished 80-82, in 3rd place in the NL Central and 3.5 games behind the division winning Cardinals. At the risk of invoking bad memories, it should be said that at this time in 2006 the Reds were in the midst of a painful and long west coast trip that ultimately derailed much of their hopes of reaching the playoffs.

The 1996 Reds have been the 3rd closest playoff race since 1995. The 1996 squad finished the season at an even 81-81, 7.0 games behind the division winning Cardinals and in 3rd place in the NL Central. They also finished 9.0 games behind the NL Wildcard Los Angeles Dodgers.

The 4th closest Reds playoff race since 1995? Well it just happens to be this season in 2007 as the Reds trail the division leader by 6.5 games (and wildcard leader by 10.5 games), albeit being in 4th place in the division. It's a feat that is amazing and sad at the same time ...

The 2002 season was the 5th closest race as the Reds were 7.5 games behind in the NL Central while in 3rd place and 10.5 games behind in the NL Wildcard. In 2002, the St. Louis Cardinals were a signicantly better team than any 2007 NL Central team, they got hot in September, and they ran away with the NL Central crown at 97-65, 19 games ahead of a Reds team that finished the season at 78-84.

Isn't it amazing that we had a better record at this point in 2004, but we were 22.5 back?

PuffyPig
08-27-2007, 12:46 PM
How about "we're more in it than Tampa Bay"?

I'd consider it a moral victory to finish with a better record than the Cardinals!


After our start, I'd consider it a championship season.:beerme:

Caveat Emperor
08-27-2007, 01:23 PM
I guess its just too bad they don't do "first half" and "second half" champions like they do in the minors.

KronoRed
08-27-2007, 01:26 PM
I guess its just too bad they don't do "first half" and "second half" champions like they do in the minors.

They should.

Really.

Cyclone792
08-27-2007, 01:28 PM
I guess its just too bad they don't do "first half" and "second half" champions like they do in the minors.

They did in 1981. While I wasn't around to experience it, I heard that didn't work out so well for the Reds that season.

RichRed
08-27-2007, 01:33 PM
They did in 1981. While I wasn't around to experience it, I heard that didn't work out so well for the Reds that season.

I'd rather not relive that memory so let's just drop it, 'kay? Thanks.

:)

cumberlandreds
08-27-2007, 01:55 PM
They did in 1981. While I wasn't around to experience it, I heard that didn't work out so well for the Reds that season.

You are right. It didn't. Reds had the best record overall for both halves and couldn't make the playoffs. It was kinda like your favorite college team who had a great season but was on probation and couldn't go to a bowl or NCAA tournament. Except the Reds didn't do anything wrong but win too many games.:thumbdown

PuffyPig
08-27-2007, 02:22 PM
You are right. It didn't. Reds had the best record overall for both halves and couldn't make the playoffs. It was kinda like your favorite college team who had a great season but was on probation and couldn't go to a bowl or NCAA tournament. Except the Reds didn't do anything wrong but win too many games.:thumbdown


It was worse than that.

We had the best record on the majors that year.

I believe the team with the second best record in the majors also didn't make the playoffs.

westofyou
08-27-2007, 02:23 PM
1981 STANDINGS

AMERICAN LEAGUE EAST--1ST HALF
TEAM W L PCT GB
Yankees 34 22 .607 -
Orioles 31 23 .574 2
Brewers 31 25 .554 3
Tigers 31 26 .544 3.5
Red Sox 30 26 .536 4
Indians 26 24 .520 5
Blue Jays 16 42 .276 19

AMERICAN LEAGUE EAST--2ND HALF
TEAM W L PCT GB
Brewers 31 22 .585 -
Red Sox 29 23 .558 1.5
Tigers 29 23 .558 1.5
Orioles 28 23 .549 2
Indians 26 27 .491 5
Yankees 25 26 .490 5
Blue Jays 21 27 .438 7.5

AMERICAN LEAGUE WEST--1ST HALF
TEAM W L PCT GB
A's 37 23 .617 -
Rangers 33 22 .600 1.5
White Sox 31 22 .585 2.5
Angels 31 29 .517 6
Royals 20 30 .400 12
Mariners 21 36 .368 14.5
Twins 17 39 .304 18

AMERICAN LEAGUE WEST--2ND HALF
TEAM W L PCT GB
Royals 30 23 .566 -
A's 27 22 .551 1
Rangers 24 26 .480 4.5
Twins 24 29 .453 6
Mariners 23 29 .442 6.5
White Sox 23 30 .434 7
Angels 20 30 .400 8.5

NATIONAL LEAGUE EAST--1ST HALF
TEAM W L PCT GB
Phillies 34 21 .618 -
Cardinals 30 20 .600 1.5
Expos 30 25 .545 4
Pirates 25 23 .521 5.5
Mets 17 34 .333 15
Cubs 15 37 .288 17.5

NATIONAL LEAGUE EAST--2ND HALF
TEAM W L PCT GB
Expos 30 23 .566 -
Cardinals 29 23 .558 0.5
Phillies 25 27 .481 4.5
Mets 24 28 .462 5.5
Cubs 23 28 .451 6
Pirates 21 33 .389 9.5

NATIONAL LEAGUE WEST--1ST HALF
TEAM W L PCT GB
Dodgers 36 21 .632 -
Reds 35 21 .625 0.5
Astros 28 29 .491 8
Braves 25 29 .463 9.5
Giants 27 32 .458 10
Padres 23 33 .411 12.5

NATIONAL LEAGUE WEST--2ND HALF
TEAM W L PCT GB
Astros 33 20 .623 -
Reds 31 21 .596 1.5
Giants 29 23 .558 3.5
Dodgers 27 26 .509 6
Braves 25 27 .481 7.5
Padres 18 36 .333 15.5

AMERICAN LEAGUE EAST DIVISION SERIES
Yankees 5, Brewers 3
Yankees 3, Brewers 0
Brewers 5, Yankees 3
Brewers 2, Yankees 1
Yankees 7, Brewers 3
Yankees won the series, 3-2

AMERICAN LEAGUE WEST DIVISION SERIES
A's 4, Royals 0
A's 2, Royals 1
A's 4, Royals 1
A's won the series, 3-0

NATIONAL LEAGUE EAST DIVISION SERIES
Expos 3, Phillies 1
Expos 3, Phillies 1
Phillies 6, Expos 2
Phillies 6, Expos 5 (10)
Expos 3, Phillies 0
Expos won the series, 3-0

NATIONAL LEAGUE WEST DIVISION SERIES
Astros 3, Dodgers 1
Astros 1, Dodgers 0 (11)
Dodgers 6, Astros 1
Dodgers 2, Astros 1
Dodgers 4, Astros 0
Dodgers won the series, 3-2

AMERICAN LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES
Yankees 3, A's 1
Yankees 13, A's 3
Yankees 4, A's 0
Yankees won the series, 3-0
MVP--Graig Nettles

NATIONAL LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES
Dodgers 5, Expos 1
Expos 3, Dodgers 0
Expos 4, Dodgers 1
Dodgers 7, Expos 1
Dodgers 2, Expos 1
Dodgers won the series, 3-2
MVP--Burt Hooton

WORLD SERIES
Yankees 5, Dodgers 3
Yankees 3, Dodgers 0
Dodgers 5, Yankees 4
Dodgers 8, Yankees 7
Dodgers 2, Yankees 1
Dodgers 9, Yankees 2
Dodgers won the series, 4-2
MVPs--Ron Cey, Pedro Guerrero, Steve Yeager

cumberlandreds
08-27-2007, 02:32 PM
I went to a game in the first half that season that probably would have tied the Reds with the Dodgers. In late May the Reds jumped out to 6-0 lead against the Giants. The rains came about the third inning and washed the game away. If the rain could have held off another hour a completely different way of doing the playoffs that year may have happened. I have wondered what MLB would have done if the Reds and Dodgers were tied?

Unassisted
08-27-2007, 02:42 PM
I went to a game in the first half that season that probably would have tied the Reds with the Dodgers. In late May the Reds jumped out to 6-0 lead against the Giants. The rains came about the third inning and washed the game away. If the rain could have held off another hour a completely different way of doing the playoffs that year may have happened. I have wondered what MLB would have done if the Reds and Dodgers were tied?

MLB was using one-game playoffs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Game_Playoff#Game_history) to resolve ties back in the days of 2 divisions. According to that wikipedia article, the American League has always used the one-game playoff, but the National League used a three-game playoff until 1969.

Chip R
08-27-2007, 02:44 PM
I went to a game in the first half that season that probably would have tied the Reds with the Dodgers. In late May the Reds jumped out to 6-0 lead against the Giants. The rains came about the third inning and washed the game away. If the rain could have held off another hour a completely different way of doing the playoffs that year may have happened. I have wondered what MLB would have done if the Reds and Dodgers were tied?


I'm guessing there would have been a playoff for the first half championship. I would guess something similar has happened in minor league baseball.

Sea Ray
08-27-2007, 04:08 PM
It's BS that they'd allow a "winner" to win a division by a half game anyway. They don't allow that in a normal season. I don't understand why the Dodgers were given the nod over the Reds just because they played one more game.

redsmetz
08-27-2007, 04:13 PM
It was worse than that.

We had the best record on the majors that year.

I believe the team with the second best record in the majors also didn't make the playoffs.

It was the Cardinals and neither of us went. I'm sure I shared this here, but my wife and I were married on the second last day of the season. She's from Missouri and grew up a Cards fan (I've since converted her!) and we were looking forward to the fireworks that would have happened on our honeymoon had the Reds and St. Louis been in the playoffs against each other. :thumbup:

westofyou
08-27-2007, 05:05 PM
It's BS that they'd allow a "winner" to win a division by a half game anyway. They don't allow that in a normal season. I don't understand why the Dodgers were given the nod over the Reds just because they played one more game.

Because the owners voted for that method, including the Reds.

Sea Ray
08-27-2007, 05:38 PM
Because the owners voted for that method, including the Reds.

Yes, baseball owners vote to do a lot of dumb things. I'm just saying that is one of them.

Always Red
08-27-2007, 06:20 PM
Yes, baseball owners vote to do a lot of dumb things. I'm just saying that is one of them.

That was back in the day before the wild card, so it amounted to an extra round of playoffs, which equated to extra $$ also.

I'm not saying that particular decision was made because of $, but making more money has always been a goal of an owner of nearly every enterprise.

westofyou
08-27-2007, 06:22 PM
That was back in the day before the wild card, so it amounted to an extra round of playoffs, which equated to extra $$ also.

I'm not saying that particular decision was made because of $, but making more money has always been a goal of an owner of nearly every enterprise.

Yep, plus the idea of creating a new race that involved all the teams was the goal, they wanted to pique interest around the league, not just where it was all good prior to the strike.

PuffyPig
08-28-2007, 10:47 AM
Yes, baseball owners vote to do a lot of dumb things. I'm just saying that is one of them.


The really stupid thing is that the league had a better alternative.

SInce the league obviously need to keep fan interest, they had to create a seconf half, with th winner going to the playoffs. I can live with that.

But, instead of awarding the first half winner a playoff spot (which was unfair becuse it was awarded after the fact in that no one at the time knew they were in a first half playoff race), they should have awarded the other playoff spot to the team that had the best overall record. In that way they could award the team with the best second half record(to keep fan interest) and secondly, they could award the best overall team. Giving a playoff spot to the first half winner was akin to pulling a name out of the hat.

Matt700wlw
08-28-2007, 03:42 PM
85 should win the Central...

82 or 83 might....


To get 85.....the Reds need to go 26-6.

Always Red
08-28-2007, 03:45 PM
85 should win the Central...

82 or 83 might....


To get 85.....the Reds need to go 26-6.

I think it would be a monumental feat for this team to reach 81 wins, after the start they had.

I wouldn't expect them to win the Central, but never say never (even though I did say they were out of it by Memorial Day weekend). :)

Matt700wlw
08-28-2007, 03:46 PM
I think it would be a monumental feat for this team to reach 81 wins, after the start they had.

I wouldn't expect them to win the Central, but never say never (even though I did say they were out of it by Memorial Day weekend). :)

So did I

Sea Ray
08-28-2007, 03:50 PM
6 losses the rest of the year is about one loss per week. That means every week has to be as good as this past week. They'll be lucky if they have one more week as good as last week.

DoogMinAmo
08-29-2007, 01:32 AM
6 losses the rest of the year is about one loss per week. That means every week has to be as good as this past week. They'll be lucky if they have one more week as good as last week.

They just had their quota for the next two weeks in one day. :eek:

Eric_Davis
08-29-2007, 02:07 AM
As long as Ellison is getting more than 3 AB's a week and Ross continues to hit .200, then no, the REDS won't get within 5 games of first place.

toledodan
08-29-2007, 02:22 AM
As long as Ellison is getting more than 3 AB's a week and Ross continues to hit .200, then no, the REDS won't get within 5 games of first place.


i agree. alot of the air left my sail tonight. all the praise i had for PM i lost after some of his decisions in the double header.

Edskin
08-29-2007, 08:47 AM
Well, at least they slammed the small window shut in one big swoop......rather than leaving a small crack for our collective fingers to get smashed down the road.

Roy Tucker
08-29-2007, 09:07 AM
Well, Cincinnati pennant fever lasted exactly one day.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-29-2007, 09:23 AM
Yes, leave it to the Reds to get swept in a rare DH, when we were starting to get pulled in.

Oh well. It was fun to dream for a day.

Joseph
08-29-2007, 09:29 AM
Yes, leave it to the Reds to get swept in a rare DH, when we were starting to get pulled in.

Oh well. It was fun to dream for a day.

My sentiments exactly.

Always Red
08-29-2007, 10:05 AM
Well, Cincinnati pennant fever lasted exactly one day.

That should be the slogan for the 2007 season, Roy.

"Pennant Fever, don't blink or you'll miss it!" :beerme:

membengal
08-29-2007, 10:09 AM
Just would have been nice to see them at least give Hamilton one start in a night with 18 planned innings constituting two fairly significant games.

He's one of the best bats on this team, right? 62 at-bats is not near enough of a sample size to drop him into a platoon and watch someone like Jason Ellison start over him.

Management of this team continues to play the role of Lucy-holding-the-football. For reasons I can't fathom, I continue to be Charlie Brown, trying once more to kick it. Once more, I find myself lying flat on my back, staring at the sky, and wondering how I could have fallen for it yet again.

That's on me.

Falls City Beer
08-29-2007, 10:42 AM
My little pessimistic heart ain't broken. It's a rare benefit of seeing the cloud instead of the chintz lining.

nate
08-29-2007, 11:00 AM
My little pessimistic heart ain't broken. It's a rare benefit of seeing the cloud instead of the chintz lining.

Oddly, my "optimistic heart" isn't broken either.

We didn't "lose the season" last night.

The season was lost April 8-10, May 2-5, May 22-27 and a variety of other dates _in concert_ with last night.

I'd love for them to pull of some miraculous comeback.

I'm just not gonna put money on it.

Cyclone792
08-29-2007, 11:15 AM
BP's playoff odds for the Reds dropped from 0.85 percent yesterday to 0.30 percent today. That's not surprising given that the Reds lost ground on all three teams in front of them.

The Reds could afford to lose two or fewer games per week if they wanted any realistic shot. They've still only lost two games so far this week, but unfortunately it's only Wednesday right now. It took a six game winning streak last week just to get them to where they were heading into Pittsburgh, and it'll pretty much take winning the next five games by splitting with the Pirates and sweeping the Cardinals just to get back to that point and remain on the path heading into the homestand.

vaticanplum
08-29-2007, 11:28 AM
BP's playoff odds for the Reds dropped from 0.85 percent yesterday to 0.30 percent today. That's not surprising given that the Reds lost ground on all three teams in front of them.

So what you're saying is, we're heartbroken that the Reds' chances have just dropped from under 1% to under 1% :)

mbgrayson
08-29-2007, 02:26 PM
Also, if the Reds lose again tonight to the Pirates, we drop to 5th place again. The Astros are safely in last. (For now, anyway...)

wheels
08-29-2007, 04:28 PM
It's over, Johnny.

redsfan4445
08-29-2007, 04:41 PM
they had a chance till Jerry, I mean Pete MACK managed the game..

in the starting lineup for game #1? 3 starters with zero homers between them (Hopper, Ellison and Cantu) On the Bench? 63 homers between Dunn, Hamilton and Hatteberg..

I am sure the Pirates were not as stressed when they saw the lineup!

Falls City Beer
08-29-2007, 06:56 PM
They had NO chance when Big Wayne sat on his hands all winter.

Matt700wlw
08-29-2007, 06:57 PM
What small bit of hope there was going into this series was pretty much shattered last night.

Can't do what they did and expect to help your cause

pedro
08-29-2007, 07:04 PM
seriously, the amount of hand wringing, moaning, and second guessing on the site is beyond funny.

some of you must really be a blast to hang out with.

jojo
08-29-2007, 07:13 PM
seriously, the amount of hand wringing, moaning, and second guessing on the site is beyond funny.

some of you must really be a blast to hang out with.

Yes and that FCB guy takes the cake. It's not even a blast not hanging out with him...... :D

:mooner:

An undefeated week is too much to ask for every week but I don't think getting swept in a doubleheader necessarily means an end to the Reds playing enjoyable baseball the rest of the year.

Falls City Beer
08-29-2007, 07:16 PM
seriously, the amount of hand wringing, moaning, and second guessing on the site is beyond funny.

some of you must really be a blast to hang out with.

Handwringing? Second guessing?

You don't have to do any of those when you know exactly what's going to happen.

The only handwringing going on is coming from people who are grousing about Mac's moves last night. Talk about missing the big picture.

pedro
08-29-2007, 07:16 PM
Yes and that FCB guy takes the cake. It's not even a blast not hanging out with him...... :D

:mooner:

An undefeated week is too much to ask for every week but I don't think getting swept in a doubleheader necessarily means an end to the Reds playing enjoyable baseball the rest of the year.

actually I think FCB would be fine company. We'd just have to talk about David Berman.

RFS62
08-29-2007, 07:20 PM
seriously, the amount of hand wringing, moaning, and second guessing on the site is beyond funny.

some of you must really be a blast to hang out with.



Abandon hope, all ye who enter here....

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Michelino_DanteAndHisPoem.jpg