# Reds' 2010 magic number

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 7 of 41 First ... 3456789101117 ... Last
• 09-05-2010, 05:12 PM
Brutus
Re: Reds' magic number
Quote:

Originally Posted by Degenerate39
Is the magic number still 21?

Yessir. The magic number never goes up, only stays the same or goes down.
• 09-05-2010, 05:23 PM
Degenerate39
Re: Reds' magic number
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp
Yessir. The magic number never goes up, only stays the same or goes down.

And in order for it to go down. The Reds have to win or the Cards have to lose. But what if they both lose the same day? Or what if the Reds play win on the Cards day off?
• 09-05-2010, 05:39 PM
Big Klu
Re: Reds' magic number
Quote:

Originally Posted by Degenerate39
And in order for it to go down. The Reds have to win or the Cards have to lose. But what if they both lose the same day? Or what if the Reds play win on the Cards day off?

If they both lose on the same day, then Cardinals have lost and the number decreases by one.

If the Reds were to play and win while the Cardinals have a day off (not possible this season, since the Cards have no off days remaining), then the Reds would have won and the number decreases by one.

If both win on the same day, then the Reds have won and the number decreases by one.

If the Reds win and the Cardinals lose (or if the Reds beat the Cards like they did on Saturday), then the number decreases by two--one for the Reds win, and one for the Cards loss.
• 09-05-2010, 05:41 PM
Re: Reds' magic number
Quote:

Originally Posted by Degenerate39
And in order for it to go down. The Reds have to win or the Cards have to lose. But what if they both lose the same day? Or what if the Reds play win on the Cards day off?

Any time the Reds win a the majic number goes down by one.

Any time the Cards lose the majic number goes down one.

If the Reds would have won today the majic number would have droped two.
• 09-07-2010, 10:59 PM
Reds Freak
Re: Reds' magic number
• 09-07-2010, 11:04 PM
Big Klu
Re: Reds' magic number
• 09-07-2010, 11:04 PM
Big Klu
Re: Reds' magic number
• 09-07-2010, 11:05 PM
Big Klu
Re: Reds' magic number
• 09-07-2010, 11:08 PM
mbgrayson
Re: Reds' magic number
• 09-07-2010, 11:09 PM
Big Klu
Re: Reds' magic number
http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/503...1E70F2B3269972

I posted all four of these in part to show how the road uniform had changed over time.
• 09-07-2010, 11:10 PM
Big Klu
Re: Reds' magic number
Tommy Helms is now on deck.

Ted Kluszewski/Benito Santiago are in the hole.
• 09-07-2010, 11:36 PM
Re: Reds' magic number
Quote:

Originally Posted by Reds Freak
Did Deion ever play in the playoffs with the Reds?

No. The 1995 team needed pitching, so they traded Deion in the deal that got them Dave Burba, Mark Portugal, and Darren Lewis. Lewis was used as Sanders' replacement, and although he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, he played some of the best outfield defense in the game. Burba and Portugal each helped anchor the rotation into the following year. Overall, it was one of Bowden's best trades.
• 09-08-2010, 12:03 AM
Big Klu
Re: Reds' magic number
Quote:

No. The 1995 team needed pitching, so they traded Deion in the deal that got them Dave Burba, Mark Portugal, and Darren Lewis. Lewis was used as Sanders' replacement, and although he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, he played some of the best outfield defense in the game. Burba and Portugal each helped anchor the rotation into the following year. Overall, it was one of Bowden's best trades.

I never saw the need for Darren Lewis. Thomas Howard, Jerome Walton, and even Reggie Sanders could provide adequate defense in CF, and much better sticks.
• 09-08-2010, 12:18 AM
Re: Reds' magic number
Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Klu
I never saw the need for Darren Lewis. Thomas Howard, Jerome Walton, and even Reggie Sanders could provide adequate defense in CF, and much better sticks.

A lot of people--myself included--were critical of having Lewis as a leadoff hitter, but this was back in the day when you 'needed' a speedy player at the top of your order (remember the Dave-Wells-for-Curtis-Goodwin trade? :barf:).

Barry Larkin was vocal about not wanting to bat first, and both Reggie Sanders and Ron Gant were middle-of-the-order hitters. Thomas Howard and Jerome Walton weren't slow, but they weren't 30+ SB threats like Lewis.

It may not have made much sense to keep putting Lewis out there, but it would've been fairly unconventional to use someone else on the roster.
• 09-08-2010, 08:12 AM
BCubb2003
Re: Reds' magic number
Quote:
That's a freaky uniform.
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 7 of 41 First ... 3456789101117 ... Last