Originally Posted by reds700
So am I really the only one that pays attention to how the team is doing against quality opponents? I just think you have to play at least .500 ball against quality teams to be taken seriously come playoff time. Yes, you can make the playoffs without doing so, but I think the chances of winning a World Series are still small if you haven't proven that you can consistently defeat the good teams, unless you are the Cardinals. But the Reds aren't the Cardinals. They are not going to have some random A ball player come up at playoff time and bat .700 to lead the playoff charge.
I guess the argument is what do people consider quality competition? I consider the Reds 2-5 in series against quality competition this year. 3-5 if you count the Brewers. I understand that other people may consider different teams quality competition.
IMO, the term "quality competition" is tough to pin down early in the season. Your mention of the Brewers is a good example. They have a poor record (15-20) largely because they are 1-9 in the last ten. But in those ten games, they are 0-7 against the Cardinals and Reds. So their season record is greatly effected by those two series against two of the NL's three best teams record-wise. If the Brewers had played lesser foes in those seven games they would possibly have a much better overall record, and therefore move into the "quality competition" category. My point is, I think it's too early to determine what is a quality opponent and what isn't (with a few obvious exceptions for each side).