Transmogrified Tiger wrote:So you give the Cardinals the same number of games(it'll actually be more when the season ends), and they're ~5 games behind the Cubs team that won 103 games and is one of the best teams of the last 10-20 years.
The Cardinals are not one of the top 3 teams in the NL, and they're a beneficiary of the division(which itself is just a couple games out of 162 difference compared to playing the NL East/West), but that doesn't mean they're mediocre or not having a legitimately good season.
10 games as of right now, but who's counting? I guess it all depends on what you think is a good team. The 2016 Cubs weren't playing teams with a .420 and below winning percentages (in their division). The Cardinals would be in 3rd place in the NL East, 2nd place in the NL West. The only division they would be leading other than the NL Central is the AL Central. They are the king of the dipshits, a wildcard team. The definition of mildly ok.
I was talking about against .500+ teams when mentioning 5 games since that's the record you were quoting.
At the same point in their schedule(after game 120), the 2016 Cubs had teams with a .433 and .425 record in their division, and the Reds finished at .420. But also we're putting too much emphasis on how much of an impact that has on another team's record. The difference between a .400 winning percentage and .450 at this point in the season is around 7 games out of 120, it's meaningful but not the difference in playing a playoff team vs. Eastwestern State University. The difference across a division schedule is only a couple of games on the high end, and this year it's mitigated by the NL Central being matched with the toughest AL division(the AL East) in interleague.