4/25 Brewers (Sheets) @ Cubs (Lilly) 1:20 PM WGN/WGN720

[Soriano12]

7-9 hitters were 4-10 today. I never want to see Izzterrible on the field again.

[Banedon]

In 2005, the Indians had 93 wins but were 22-36 in one run games. That same season, Seattle had 69 wins but was 26-23 in one run games

 

ok...but putting that in context...seattle didn't make the postseason...therefore, it has no event on my arguement

 

are you serious?

yes

 

I'm confused as to why the Seattle record "has no event".

 

The point was that Seattle had a winning record in one run games, and yet that didn't affect their overall record.

 

Indians had a losing record in one run games, and yet they managed to still win 93 games.

 

Those are both significant in that it shows that one run games have little to no effect on overall record.

 

Who made the playoffs has nothing to do with anything.

[jersey cubs fan]

Not to be negative, but this win means nothing if we turn around and tank tomorrow.

 

Tomorrow's an offday.

 

Which just proves all the more that if they do tank, this win will be meaningless.

[anabiono]

In 2005, the Indians had 93 wins but were 22-36 in one run games. That same season, Seattle had 69 wins but was 26-23 in one run games

 

ok...but putting that in context...seattle didn't make the postseason...therefore, it has no event on my arguement

 

are you serious?

yes

 

I'm confused as to why the Seattle record "has no event".

 

The point was that Seattle had a winning record in one run games, and yet that didn't affect their overall record.

 

Indians had a losing record in one run games, and yet they managed to still win 93 games.

 

Those are both significant in that it shows that one run games have little to no effect on overall record.

 

Who made the playoffs has nothing to do with anything.

 

yeah, i meant to say no bearing...i am just waking up...sorry for the shoddy typing...

 

but i am not relating it to the season...i am trying to relate it to the postseason and series

[Chocolate Milk]

Not to be negative, but this win means nothing if we turn around and tank tomorrow.

 

Tomorrow's an offday.

 

Which just proves all the more that if they do tank, this win will be meaningless.

 

What if they get tanked?

[DiamondMind]

Not to be negative, but this win means nothing if we turn around and tank tomorrow.

 

Tomorrow's an offday.

 

Which just proves all the more that if they do tank, this win will be meaningless.

 

SIGH. The day AFTER tomorrow then. Thank you for checking my homework, mom.

[Soriano12]

Not to be negative, but this win means nothing if we turn around and tank tomorrow.

 

Tomorrow's an offday.

 

Which just proves all the more that if they do tank, this win will be meaningless.

 

The latest Vegas line has the Off Day over the Cubs

[anabiono]

Not to be negative, but this win means nothing if we turn around and tank tomorrow.

 

Tomorrow's an offday.

 

Which just proves all the more that if they do tank, this win will be meaningless.

 

What if they get tanked?

 

i don't think i can handle getting demolished by the cardinals again

[jersey cubs fan]

Not to be negative, but this win means nothing if we turn around and tank tomorrow.

 

Tomorrow's an offday.

 

Which just proves all the more that if they do tank, this win will be meaningless.

 

What if they get tanked?

 

Than we're all winners.

[BigSlick]

In 2005, the Indians had 93 wins but were 22-36 in one run games. That same season, Seattle had 69 wins but was 26-23 in one run games

 

ok...but putting that in context...seattle didn't make the postseason...therefore, it has no event on my arguement

 

are you serious?

yes

 

I'm confused as to why the Seattle record "has no event".

 

The point was that Seattle had a winning record in one run games, and yet that didn't affect their overall record.

 

Indians had a losing record in one run games, and yet they managed to still win 93 games.

 

Those are both significant in that it shows that one run games have little to no effect on overall record.

 

Who made the playoffs has nothing to do with anything.

 

yeah, i meant to say no bearing...i am just waking up...sorry for the shoddy typing...

 

but i am not relating it to the season...i am trying to relate it to the postseason and series

 

I think if you did the research it would show little to no correlation between "record in 1 run games" and "postseason success"

[Banedon]

In 2005, the Indians had 93 wins but were 22-36 in one run games. That same season, Seattle had 69 wins but was 26-23 in one run games

 

ok...but putting that in context...seattle didn't make the postseason...therefore, it has no event on my arguement

 

are you serious?

yes

 

I'm confused as to why the Seattle record "has no event".

 

The point was that Seattle had a winning record in one run games, and yet that didn't affect their overall record.

 

Indians had a losing record in one run games, and yet they managed to still win 93 games.

 

Those are both significant in that it shows that one run games have little to no effect on overall record.

 

Who made the playoffs has nothing to do with anything.

 

yeah, i meant to say no bearing...i am just waking up...sorry for the shoddy typing...

 

but i am not relating it to the season...i am trying to relate it to the postseason and series

 

I see. I'm not sure why we should be concerned about our one-run record then, because if we don't make the playoffs, it doesn't matter at all then. It's April, and we're 5 games back already. Lets just concentrate on getting back to .500...blowouts or not.

[C.C.]

Not to be negative, but this win means nothing if we turn around and tank tomorrow.

 

Tomorrow's an offday.

 

Which just proves all the more that if they do tank, this win will be meaningless.

 

What if they get tanked?

 

Is Farns back on the team?

[Butterscup1679666578]

Lou: "Theriot will be at shortstop"

 

 

!!!!!!

[Omar]

Lou: "Theriot will be at shortstop"

 

 

!!!!!!

 

Also says he fits in the 2-hole nicely.

[Soriano12]

Lou: "Theriot will be at shortstop"

 

 

!!!!!!

 

Also says he fits in the 2-hole nicely.

 

I think he fits in the 1-hole nicely.

[CubinNY]

Lou: "Theriot will be at shortstop"

 

 

!!!!!!

 

Also says he fits in the 2-hole nicely.

That didn't come out quite right.

[C.C.]

Lou: "Theriot will be at shortstop"

 

 

!!!!!!

 

Also says he fits in the 2-hole nicely.

That didn't come out quite right.

 

Sounds like a Jeanna Jameson film shoot.

[RichHillIsABeast]

Hahahahaha. That's awesome.

 

Lou really doesn't care if you make millions or the league minimum.

[Banedon]

yeah, i meant to say no bearing...i am just waking up...sorry for the shoddy typing...

 

but i am not relating it to the season...i am trying to relate it to the postseason and series

 

Admittedly, this is only one example, but...

 

2006 World Series Champion StL Cardinals record in one-run games...22-27.

[anabiono]

In 2005, the Indians had 93 wins but were 22-36 in one run games. That same season, Seattle had 69 wins but was 26-23 in one run games

 

ok...but putting that in context...seattle didn't make the postseason...therefore, it has no event on my arguement

 

are you serious?

yes

 

I'm confused as to why the Seattle record "has no event".

 

The point was that Seattle had a winning record in one run games, and yet that didn't affect their overall record.

 

Indians had a losing record in one run games, and yet they managed to still win 93 games.

 

Those are both significant in that it shows that one run games have little to no effect on overall record.

 

Who made the playoffs has nothing to do with anything.

 

yeah, i meant to say no bearing...i am just waking up...sorry for the shoddy typing...

 

but i am not relating it to the season...i am trying to relate it to the postseason and series

 

 

I see. I'm not sure why we should be concerned about our one-run record then, because if we don't make the playoffs, it doesn't matter at all then. It's April, and we're 5 games back already. Lets just concentrate on getting back to .500...blowouts or not.

 

let me just say this...i was being melodramatic when i said the 40 game win streak stuff...i will take that in the off chase it happened and be high on life because of it...but...i still think it is foolish to believe that there will be no close games in the playoffs

 

all i am saying is that, so far, it looks like the cubs have a very bad habit of choking or just plain giving in when it is a close game

 

i just really want to see that change is all

 

because, personally, i want this team to be running on all cylinders when going into the playoffs...i want them to chew up teams and spit them out...i want them to lay waste to the NL field, and then i want them to walk into the series and mark their territory in a very unforgettable way...

 

i just want total domination...is that too much to ask?

 

 

8-)

[dew1679666265]

Hahahahaha. That's awesome.

 

Lou really doesn't care if you make millions or the league minimum.

 

His concern is who produces and who doesn't. I honestly thought he'd give Izzy a little more time, but I'm not complaining about the move.

 

Am I understanding right that he said in the postgame that Theriot's the new SS fulltime (or at least mostly)?

[98navigator]

Lou: "Theriot will be at shortstop"

 

 

!!!!!!

 

Also says he fits in the 2-hole nicely.

That didn't come out quite right.

 

Sounds like a Jeanna Jameson film shoot.

 

:whistle:

[anabiono]

yeah, i meant to say no bearing...i am just waking up...sorry for the shoddy typing...

 

but i am not relating it to the season...i am trying to relate it to the postseason and series

 

Admittedly, this is only one example, but...

 

2006 World Series Champion StL Cardinals record in one-run games...22-27.

 

i am still mad because of last year...but i see what you are getting at

 

god i hope they kick the living crap out of those punks this weekend

[98navigator]

Hahahahaha. That's awesome.

 

Lou really doesn't care if you make millions or the league minimum.

 

His concern is who produces and who doesn't. I honestly thought he'd give Izzy a little more time, but I'm not complaining about the move.

 

Am I understanding right that he said in the postgame that Theriot's the new SS fulltime (or at least mostly)?

 

Yes, he said Theriot will start at SS.

[slieb85]

In 2005, the Indians had 93 wins but were 22-36 in one run games. That same season, Seattle had 69 wins but was 26-23 in one run games

 

ok...but putting that in context...seattle didn't make the postseason...therefore, it has no event on my arguement

 

are you serious?

yes

 

I'm confused as to why the Seattle record "has no event".

 

The point was that Seattle had a winning record in one run games, and yet that didn't affect their overall record.

 

Indians had a losing record in one run games, and yet they managed to still win 93 games.

 

Those are both significant in that it shows that one run games have little to no effect on overall record.

 

Who made the playoffs has nothing to do with anything.

 

yeah, i meant to say no bearing...i am just waking up...sorry for the shoddy typing...

 

but i am not relating it to the season...i am trying to relate it to the postseason and series

 

I think St. louis had a losing record in 2run and 1 run games last year, might have been just 1run games but either way. All that matters is getting there and getting hot as it begins, not being tested or knowing how to win close games. i do agree that i wouldn't have minded them winning a close game just cause it's more exciting and i would like to see how lou really feels our bullpen should be set up (hopefully weurtz then demp). but no one should be complaining about finally winning any game