Reds 17th, up from 19th.
"The Reds have scored a major league best 107 runs. The Reds have allowed a major league worst 102 runs. Yet they have 10 wins."
Reds 17th, up from 19th.
"The Reds have scored a major league best 107 runs. The Reds have allowed a major league worst 102 runs. Yet they have 10 wins."
Don't we have 12 wins?
The power rankings are as of 4/21Originally Posted by reds44
I don't put too much stock into those rankings. I don't care how we win games, as long as we win.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ngs/index.html
Si.com has Cincy #8....4 NL Central teams in the top 8!!!
This again illustrates how out of touch SI is.Originally Posted by kaldaniels
When I see the 2016 Reds, I see a 100 loss team and no direction.
It actually shows how out of touch ESPN is. SI has it right on. If you go by win/loss record, the Astros, Reds, Cards, and Cubs are in the top 5 teams in the NL. Only 3 teams in the AL have a better record than the Astros, Reds, Cards, and Cubs.Originally Posted by redsfanmia
No offense, but win/loss record doesnt matter much in the first 20 games of the season.Originally Posted by MattyMo4Life
When I see the 2016 Reds, I see a 100 loss team and no direction.
I'm guessing the 1999 Reds would have liked to have had just one extra win at that end of the season. A win's a win and they all help.Originally Posted by redsfanmia
Does these wins not count when we are around the 100 games played mark? Just wondering.Originally Posted by redsfanmia
So a 4-16 start is irrelevant as compared to a 16-4 start?Originally Posted by redsfanmia
"In my day you had musicians who experimented with drugs. Now it's druggies experimenting with music" - Alfred G Clark (circa 1972)
I imagine Pirate fans might disagree with that oneOriginally Posted by redsfanmia
Or are you perhaps the one out of touch. The Power Rankings thru the first 20 games are what they are...the power rankings thru the first 20 games. You have to acknowledge that the argument can be made that the first 4 teams in the NL central are in the top 8...although I would say top 10-12 in my opinion. However, I would HARDLY call SI out of touch.Originally Posted by redsfanmia
This doesn't illustrate how out of touch either one is, what this illustrates is what they created the power rankings to do, generate business and get people talking. To me, baseball is a great sport because there can be such a debate over who is the strongest team. Baseball games are won in all different fashions. A team can be tearing up the opposition on offense and shutting them down on defense, or a team can be like the reds and tearing up the opposition on offense with less than stellar defense and pitching, or a team can be winning seemingly by luck in 1 or 2 run games that are low scoring. The question then becomes who is the most powerful, of course the first answer would be the one tearing it up on offense and dominating on defense and pitching, but after that which one takes over? At the end of the year the power rankings mean nothing, the win loss record means everything, but during the season for some reason the media thinks power rankings actually mean something, when they don't in reality. At the end of the day, a win is a win and a loss is a loss, whoever has the best ratio of wins to losses is the winner.
Power rankings are fun to look at, but they don't mean anything if there isn't any correlation to the win/loss record.Originally Posted by acredsfan
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. |