Does these wins not count when we are around the 100 games played mark? Just wondering.Originally Posted by redsfanmia
Does these wins not count when we are around the 100 games played mark? Just wondering.
I think wins matter. I think the Reds need as many as possible, and should try to get them any possible way--be it by good pitching, overwhelming offense or any combination of the two. I'd rather be 13-7 after 20 games than the usual 7-13.
Where we gonna go?
All I am saying is that I will be a believer when the Reds are 10 or 12 games over 500 at the 100 game mark. I have been burned buy good starts before. Look at Houston last year they were terrible at the beggining of the season and then turned it around. I am just saying that the power rankings dont matter at all. Every team in the league will have a good 20 game stretch.
When I see the 2016 Reds, I see a 100 loss team and no direction.
Really, although fun to look at, "Power Rankings" are useless in Baseball if you're using them like they do in football. Football power rankings work because there are only 16 games in a season, and the teams are forced to put forth their best effort every game. The stronger team usually does win, and there really aren't many huge surprises. Baseball, on the other hand, is not as predictable from game to game, and is so streak oriented, that it renders power rankings useless if you are looking for some long-term oriented prediction. I'm not saying football games are completely predictable, but they are to some degree.
Peter King's NFL power rankings (the fine fifteen) had the Chargers at #2 through most of the season (even when they had a losing record). They of course, missed the playoffs.
Power Rankings are fun, but I put no actual stock in them.
Welcome back, Zombie. I know you don't really have the opportunity to visit RedsZone much anymore. Nice to see you're making the best use of your time.
"I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful
I'd trust Si's take about as much as I would my ability to shoe a horse.
“And when finally they sense that some position cannot be sustained, they do not re-examine their ideas. Instead, they simply change the subject.” Jamie Galbraith
So a 4-16 start is irrelevant as compared to a 16-4 start?
"In my day you had musicians who experimented with drugs. Now it's druggies experimenting with music" - Alfred G Clark (circa 1972)
I don't care much for either SI or ESPN's take on things. Although, by looking at the rankings, SI's rankings seem to correlate much closer to the actual standings.
I imagine Pirate fans might disagree with that one
Dunkel Index has the a bit higher.
http://www.dunkelindex.com/MLB_Baseball_Rankings.asp
"I notice that I'm throwing hard when I hear the crowd gasping," - Chapman
Posting Permissions
|
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. |
