Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Disturbing trend

  1. #1
    5.3 Posts Abv Replacement BluegrassRedleg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    South of Cincinnati
    Posts
    2,157

    Disturbing trend

    Not too long ago, it was suggested here that the Reds had one of the "easiest" schedules after the All-Star break. I commented that I don't put much credence in strength of schedule in baseball. After all, even the best teams usually lose one out of every three.

    Prior to recent series against the Dodgers and D-backs, in particular, the Reds Live pregame show stressed how the Reds were catching these teams "at the right time." We see how that's gone.

    My question here is do the Reds have focus issues or are the series listed below "just baseball?" It certainly appears that better the opponent, the better the Reds play. (See series against NYY, ATL, SF, STL.)


    D-Backs: Losers of 9 of their last 12, have won 2 out of 3 vs. Reds

    Indians: Losers of 7 out of 11, sweep Reds

    Tigers: Losers of 7 of 10, took 2 of 3 from Reds

    Twins: Losers of 11 out of 17, took 2 out of 3 from Reds

    Dodgers: Losers of 12 out of 15, took 2 out of 3 from Reds
    Rounding third and heading for home...

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member Ironman92's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,077
    When the Reds play well they win....and vice versa

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Bridgetown
    Posts
    1,510

    Re: Disturbing trend

    most of those teams have talent to win besides twins

    cleveland should not of swept us but they did. but so did we few days before

    we just blew few games. like against the tigers.

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    906

    Re: Disturbing trend

    i probably wouldn't put too much into it. We have taken care of our fair share of soft opponents aswell.

  6. #5
    Member BungleBengals's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    679

    Re: Disturbing trend

    The problem with the Reds and even the Bengals is that they play to the level of their opponents and not play their own game. It's frustrating to see the Bengals beat the Ravens or Steelers and then come home to lose to the Browns. Same thing with the Reds, we see them sweep the Cardinals and so far lose 2 of 3 to the Diamondbacks. I know Joey is out, but when he was here we had a stint where we swept the Indians and Mets only to go on and get swept by the Indians and lose 2 of 3 to the Twins.
    2014 Attendance 0-3
    3/31/14, 4/12/14, 8/14/15

    2013 Attendance: 6-0
    4/3/13, 4/16/13, 4/17/13, 8/3/13, 8/21/13, 9/7/13

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    480

    Re: Disturbing trend

    Besides the Twins those teams all have good rosters. I think the "playing teams at the right time" is the fallacy. When the Reds lost those games, they weren't losing to bad teams -- they were playing good teams that were at the end of a slump.
    There are only two seasons - Winter and Baseball.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    487

    Re: Disturbing trend

    IMO, there is not much to be concerned about. If you look at today's standings, the Reds have played seven teams that currently have a losing record (Cubs, Brewers, Astros, Marlins, DBacks, Padres, Twins). They are 18-12 against these teams.

    Also, IMO, one of the signs of a team that can contend is to avoid prolonged losing streaks. In 2012, the Reds longest losing streak is 4 games and that has only happened once while their longest winning streak has been 6 games which has occured on three separate occasions.

    This is professional sports, even the bottom feeders are going to win at some point. Except, of course, the '08 Lions.

  9. #8
    ZCTRMTP!!!!! texasdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,806

    Re: Disturbing trend

    Bill James, in one of his Baseball Abstracts, introduced a formula to determine how often a team of a certain winning percentage should beat a team of another winning percentage.

    Here is a brief link with that formula: http://207.56.97.150/articles/playoff2002.htm

    This formula was used to see how the Reds stacked up against both teams with winning and losing records.

    The first chart shows the teams with losing records and how the Reds have done against them.

    Code:
    ARI	1	2	44	47
    CHC	3	2	37	53
    COL 	2	1	35	56
    HOU	4	2	34	58
    MIA	2	1	44	47
    MIL	4	2	44	47
    MIN	1	2	38	53
    SDP	3	1	38	55
    TAL	20	13
    Things were weighted according to how many games the Reds have played against them. The end result is a winning percentage of .428. The Reds are 51-40 for a winning percentage of .560. Using James' formula the Reds should have expected to win 21 games.

    The second chart shows the teams with winning records and how the Reds have done against them.

    Code:
    ATL	5	1	49	41
    CLE	3	3	47	44
    DET	1	2	48	44
    LAD	1	2	49	44
    NYM	4	1	46	45
    NYY	2	1	57	34
    PIT 	4	5	51	40
    SFG	4	3	51	40
    STL	5	4	47	45
    WSN 	2	5	53	36
    TAL 	31	27
    Repeating the above process results in a .545 winning percentage. The Reds should have been expected to win 30 games.

    So, utilizing this formula, the Reds are a game down against losing teams and a game up against winning teams. That puts them right where James' formula would expect them to be at 51-40.

    That Bill James was a pretty smart guy.
    A summer watching a bad Reds' team, is still a pretty good summer.

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    All around
    Posts
    7,577

    Re: Disturbing trend

    Quote Originally Posted by texasdave View Post

    That Bill James was a pretty smart guy.
    Yes, he was, but he's gotten senile in his old age... http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sport...ong-penn-state

  11. #10
    1st pick 2022 B.B. draft George Foster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Ky
    Posts
    5,951

    Re: Disturbing trend

    I have always believed it is better to go into a series against a team on a winning streak because they are "due" to lose. I don't want to go into a series, especially on the road against a team on a losing streak for the same reason.

    There is a lot of luck into winning. Catching a team when we are hitting good, catching a team when we don't face their ace during a series, catching a team with some injuries to some key players, ETC.

    St. Louis had no business winning the Wild Card last year. The Braves had the thing wrapped up in a bow and blew it. The Braves had a 8 1/2 game lead in the Wild Card on September 4th.....God how does that happen? St. Louis was only 8 games over .500 on September 4th. St. Louis got hot and the rest is history.
    Not this year...maybe a Wild Card

  12. #11
    EMAW
    Guest

    Re: Disturbing trend

    5 of 7 since break, .714 baseball is not bad


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