Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: 2012 vs. 2013

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    234

    2012 vs. 2013

    So as of May 10 of 2013 we have:

    St. Louis 21 12 .636 - 7-5 14-7 156 114 +42 Won 1 7-3 79.4
    Cincinnati 19 16 .543 3 13-6 6-10 158 137 +21 Lost 1 6-4 48.8
    Pittsburgh 18 16 .529 3.5 10-7 8-9 132 132 0 Lost 2 4-6 28.2
    Milwaukee 15 17 .469 5.5 10-11 5-6 142 155 -13 Lost 1 3-7 15.0
    Chicago Cubs 13 21 .382 8.5 7-11 6-10 128 144 -16 Lost 1 4-6 8.5

    This exact time last year we had...

    St. Louis 20 11 .645 - 8-4 12-7 174 99 +75 Won 4
    Cincinnati 16 14 .533 3.5 8-6 8-8 116 110 +6 Won 1
    Houston 14 17 .452 6 10-8 4-9 138 129 +9 Lost 1
    Pittsburgh 14 17 .452 6 8-7 6-10 89 114 -25 Lost 1
    Milwaukee 13 18 .419 7 7-8 6-10 123 153 -30 Lost 1
    Chicago Cubs 13 18 .419 7 9-10 4-8 105 124 -19 Won 1

    The only really big difference is no Houston. I think given whom the Reds have played up to this point in the first 35 games, whom we have lost to injury and the lack of production from C,RF and LF, I think we are in a pretty good position. I look forward to the rest of the season and think any thought of changes needs to wait a bit...lets enjoy

  2. Likes:

    REDREAD (05-14-2013)

  3. #2
    All work and no play..... Vottomatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Lebanon
    Posts
    7,067

    Re: 2012 vs. 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Fan View Post
    So as of May 10 of 2013 we have:

    St. Louis 21 12 .636 - 7-5 14-7 156 114 +42 Won 1 7-3 79.4
    Cincinnati 19 16 .543 3 13-6 6-10 158 137 +21 Lost 1 6-4 48.8
    Pittsburgh 18 16 .529 3.5 10-7 8-9 132 132 0 Lost 2 4-6 28.2
    Milwaukee 15 17 .469 5.5 10-11 5-6 142 155 -13 Lost 1 3-7 15.0
    Chicago Cubs 13 21 .382 8.5 7-11 6-10 128 144 -16 Lost 1 4-6 8.5

    This exact time last year we had...

    St. Louis 20 11 .645 - 8-4 12-7 174 99 +75 Won 4
    Cincinnati 16 14 .533 3.5 8-6 8-8 116 110 +6 Won 1
    Houston 14 17 .452 6 10-8 4-9 138 129 +9 Lost 1
    Pittsburgh 14 17 .452 6 8-7 6-10 89 114 -25 Lost 1
    Milwaukee 13 18 .419 7 7-8 6-10 123 153 -30 Lost 1
    Chicago Cubs 13 18 .419 7 9-10 4-8 105 124 -19 Won 1

    The only really big difference is no Houston. I think given whom the Reds have played up to this point in the first 35 games, whom we have lost to injury and the lack of production from C,RF and LF, I think we are in a pretty good position. I look forward to the rest of the season and think any thought of changes needs to wait a bit...lets enjoy
    My only disagreement would be that if they can obtain Stanton for prospects and not any major leaguers, or significant ones.........they should do it. I don't see Ludwick coming back until mid-September or contributing much if he does.

    Obviously, I don't want to trade Cueto, Latos, Bailey, Arroyo or Cingrani. I'd trade Leake if I had to. And I don't necessarily want to. Nor do I trade Stephenson or Cingrani. And no position players. Only backups, such as Heisey.

    But I do agree, the Reds have played a tough schedule and their record is similar to last season, but with more injuries.
    "I can't take this homerism anymore." - 10xWSChamps, August 11, 2010. A Cardinals fan having a problem with all the homerism on Redszone. Classic.

    "Man do I miss the days where were didn't need a calculator and an encyclopedia of baseball metrics to enjoy a baseball game ... - MikeS21" - 8/2/12 game thread

  4. #3
    Daffy Duck RedTeamGo!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    North Canton, OH
    Posts
    2,889

    Re: 2012 vs. 2013

    My god, sir. Does every one of your posts have to include the word Stanton and who you would trade to get him?

    It is a complete pipe dream. maybe in two years, but definitely not now.

  5. #4
    Member Old school 1983's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,700

    Re: 2012 vs. 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by RedTeamGo! View Post
    My god, sir. Does every one of your posts have to include the word Stanton and who you would trade to get him?

    It is a complete pipe dream. maybe in two years, but definitely not now.
    To get Stanton the reds would have to overpay, find a three way trade, or take on nolascos contract while giving up quality major league ready talent or top quality pitching prospects.

    I'd love to have him, but it'd be more realistic to focus on more practical targets.

  6. #5
    Member Old school 1983's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,700

    Re: 2012 vs. 2013

    The biggest thing between this year and last is that last year the reds had all of the possible needed pieces to win save a leadoff guy in house. All they had to do was get them all in place. This year due to injury the reds are lacking a middle of the order bat. I just hope they can find one or someone steps up. It's easier to win without a leadoff guy than without a legit 4 guy.

  7. #6
    Member MikeThierry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo
    Posts
    3,547

    Re: 2012 vs. 2013

    I think another thing is that the Cardinals were still searching for bullpen options and they didn't fix that until Julyish last year. In 2013, the Cards have seemed to fix the pen in the right way before they got into a hole.
    “Our next home stand follows this road trip.”

    “I just want to tell everyone Happy Easter and Happy Hanukkah.” says on the day before Easter

    Mike Shannon

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    234

    Re: 2012 vs. 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Old school 1983 View Post
    The biggest thing between this year and last is that last year the reds had all of the possible needed pieces to win save a leadoff guy in house. All they had to do was get them all in place. This year due to injury the reds are lacking a middle of the order bat. I just hope they can find one or someone steps up. It's easier to win without a leadoff guy than without a legit 4 guy.
    While I like Ludwick, I don't think his loss is as huge as the loss was when we had no Votto for how long? Ludwick's numbers were nice but not great, and I would say that right now Choo's numbers have a greater impact on this offense then Ludwick's ever did. I think if Bruce and Frazier can get hot our offense lacking Ludwick isn't as bad as our offense was last year lacking a quality leadoff hitter.

  9. #8
    Blood and Thunder! Mastodon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    51

    Re: 2012 vs. 2013

    Despite everything they've been through, some road woes, slumps, injuries, we're still looking good record wise. Hopefully we catch fire in august like last year and we can pull ahead.
    I've said all winter — they talk about this team winning the division — and my comment is, they won't win it because, at the end of the day, they still are the Chicago Cubs, and they will figure out a way to screw this whole thing up. - Marty Brennaman


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25