It's time to test JJ Hardy...

swordsman · May 7, 2007

5 games out with 130 to play.

PLAY BALL!!!

Warpticon · May 7, 2007

This Brewers team is better than that Reds team. And Doug Melvin probably won't trade away his team's playoff chances in July.

Of course not. But that wasn't the point. The point is that there's still 4/5ths of a season to go, and so it's rather illogical to declare one team definitively better than the other based on current records. The Brewers have been better to date, of course. The rest is yet to be deterimined.

jersey cubs fan · May 7, 2007

This Brewers team is better than that Reds team. And Doug Melvin probably won't trade away his team's playoff chances in July.

Of course not. But that wasn't the point. The point is that there's still 4/5ths of a season to go, and so it's rather illogical to declare one team definitively better than the other based on current records. The Brewers have been better to date, of course. The rest is yet to be deterimined.

Yet to be determined, but not subject to some random selection process. The Brewers have a huge advantage. They started the season as the favorite according to many, and at the very least along the same lines as the Cubs. They'd have to fall back to a .527 pace (85 win season) to only finish with 90 wins, and .489 (79 wins) to win only 85.

Comparisons to last year's Reds are pointless and completely invalid. This is a deep, quality team that is winning everything they should win and not giving away anything. The Cubs may be just as deep and talented, but their losses are in the bank and they can't get them back.

LetsGoCubs89 · May 7, 2007

i think they are too young and will flip sooner or later. im willing to bet at the ASB, they are only a game of .500

Warpticon · May 7, 2007

This Brewers team is better than that Reds team. And Doug Melvin probably won't trade away his team's playoff chances in July.

Of course not. But that wasn't the point. The point is that there's still 4/5ths of a season to go, and so it's rather illogical to declare one team definitively better than the other based on current records. The Brewers have been better to date, of course. The rest is yet to be deterimined.

Yet to be determined, but not subject to some random selection process. The Brewers have a huge advantage. They started the season as the favorite according to many, and at the very least along the same lines as the Cubs. They'd have to fall back to a .527 pace (85 win season) to only finish with 90 wins, and .489 (79 wins) to win only 85.

Comparisons to last year's Reds are pointless and completely invalid. This is a deep, quality team that is winning everything they should win and not giving away anything. The Cubs may be just as deep and talented, but their losses are in the bank and they can't get them back.

Who said it was some random selection process? And the comparison is not invalid at all, since it was to illustrate that record 1/5 of the season alone does not make one team better than the other for the long haul.

KaiserCesar · May 7, 2007

Milwaukee Brewers

4.096 RA/G

5.064 RS/G

Chicago Cubs

3.724 RA/G

4.896 RS/G

Who has played better thus far? It's pretty even, but I'd say the Brewers have just been luckier (or less unlucky). It'll even out a little more over the next 162 games. Let it be a very good race...

98navigator · May 7, 2007

Milwaukee Brewers
4.096 RA/G
5.064 RS/G

Chicago Cubs
3.724 RA/G
4.896 RS/G

Who has played better thus far? It's pretty even, but I'd say the Brewers have just been luckier (or less unlucky). It'll even out a little more over the next 162 games. Let it be a very good race...

The numbers are all close but keep in mind that the Brewers have played 2 more games.

League Pitching

  Tm   R/G    RA    G   ERA    IP    H    H/G    BB  BB/G  HR    SO   CG  SHO  SV ERA+hmR/G rdR/G

MIL  4.10   127   31  3.49   281   276   8.9    90   2.9   24   220    2   0  13 115  3.50  4.92   

CHC  3.72   108   29  3.52   266   229   7.9    98   3.4   29   216    0   0   7 118  3.75  3.69

League Batting

Tm    R/G    R    G    AB    H    2B   3B  HR   BB    SO    BA   OBP   SLG   SB   CS  OPS+hmR/G rdR/G

MIL  5.06   157   31  1081   294   66   6   38  106   204  .272  .341  .450   18    7 115  5.89  3.92

CHC  4.90   142   29  1036   285   75   4   25   96   187  .275  .340  .428   12    8 106  4.81  5.00

abuck1220 · May 7, 2007

why are people having such a hard time admitting that the brewers are better than the cubs?

because they aren't?

really? because the standings say otherwise.

unfortunately, the division winner is determined by the standings and not a position by position >/= contest. the brewers are going to have to completely collapse or suffer some serious injuries for them not to be in contention all season.

are you implying that baseball standings after a month and some change is an accurate rating system?

that's not like you, dog.

everyone wants to look at RS/RA, which is fine...the cubs should have a better record. but they don't, and those losses are in the past. it may show that the cubs can play up the level of the brewers the rest of the season, but the losses that happened (whether they mathematically should have or not) can't be changed.

even if the cubs improve and brewers get worse starting from this date, the cubs are still in a five game hole.

seanimal · May 7, 2007

I say we'll know by 5:00 pm on June 6th which of these teams is better. Maybe.

Warpticon · May 7, 2007

Why are people making the fallacious argument that saying the Cubs could be better is like saying they have a better record now? Obviously that's not the case.

98navigator · May 7, 2007

why are people having such a hard time admitting that the brewers are better than the cubs?

because they aren't?

really? because the standings say otherwise.

unfortunately, the division winner is determined by the standings and not a position by position >/= contest. the brewers are going to have to completely collapse or suffer some serious injuries for them not to be in contention all season.

are you implying that baseball standings after a month and some change is an accurate rating system?

that's not like you, dog.

everyone wants to look at RS/RA, which is fine...the cubs should have a better record. but they don't, and those losses are in the past. it may show that the cubs can play up the level of the brewers the rest of the season, but the losses that happened (whether they mathematically should have or not) can't be changed.

even if the cubs improve and brewers get worse starting from this date, the cubs are still in a five game hole.

Both teams will play 162 games so the Cubs are in a 4 game "hole."

After tonight, the Brewers will have played 3 more games than the Cubs.

Right now, the Cubs have lost 14 games and the brewers have lost 10 games.

Drew Doughty · May 7, 2007

Milwaukee Brewers
4.096 RA/G
5.064 RS/G

Chicago Cubs
3.724 RA/G
4.896 RS/G

Who has played better thus far? It's pretty even, but I'd say the Brewers have just been luckier (or less unlucky). It'll even out a little more over the next 162 games. Let it be a very good race...

The numbers are all close but keep in mind that the Brewers have played 2 more games.

why does that matter if he's using rates?

illiniguy · May 7, 2007

why are people having such a hard time admitting that the brewers are better than the cubs?

because they aren't?

really? because the standings say otherwise.

unfortunately, the division winner is determined by the standings and not a position by position >/= contest. the brewers are going to have to completely collapse or suffer some serious injuries for them not to be in contention all season.

are you implying that baseball standings after a month and some change is an accurate rating system?

that's not like you, dog.

everyone wants to look at RS/RA, which is fine...the cubs should have a better record. but they don't, and those losses are in the past. it may show that the cubs can play up the level of the brewers the rest of the season, but the losses that happened (whether they mathematically should have or not) can't be changed.

even if the cubs improve and brewers get worse starting from this date, the cubs are still in a five game hole.

It's May 7th. Man I don't think anyone has came from 5 back with 130 to play. But go ahead and break your own arm patting yourself on the back about the Brewers being a good team, at least that way it will be a change from your gloating about how you knew Rich Hill was great.

Ender · May 7, 2007

RS/RA doesn't tell you very much at this point in the season. The data set is simply too small and one game changes things too much. I am a huge Brewer fan and I don't think the Brewers are significantly better than the Cubs. I do think the Cubs pitching will collapse eventually but I don't think the Brewers will keep hitting like they are now either so they offset each other.

seanimal · May 7, 2007

even if the cubs improve and brewers get worse starting from this date, the cubs are still in a five game hole.

5 GAMES! Season over.

illiniguy · May 7, 2007

RS/RA doesn't tell you very much at this point in the season. The data set is simply too small and one game changes things too much. I am a huge Brewer fan and I don't think the Brewers are significantly better than the Cubs. I do think the Cubs pitching will collapse eventually but I don't think the Brewers will keep hitting like they are now either so they offset each other.

I would argue your bullpen would go to hell eventually. What with Kiki Codero being an average closer in Texas for most of his career and Turnbow being the guy Cordero beat out. I also think Ben Sheets will eventually break down, he always seems too. Plus I think at some point JJ Hardy will wake up and probably bring Geoff Jenkins with him. You guys have a good team, but to think you haven't been lucky is laughable.

Ender · May 8, 2007

RS/RA doesn't tell you very much at this point in the season. The data set is simply too small and one game changes things too much. I am a huge Brewer fan and I don't think the Brewers are significantly better than the Cubs. I do think the Cubs pitching will collapse eventually but I don't think the Brewers will keep hitting like they are now either so they offset each other.
I would argue your bullpen would go to hell eventually. What with Kiki Codero being an average closer in Texas for most of his career and Turnbow being the guy Cordero beat out. I also think Ben Sheets will eventually break down, he always seems too. Plus I think at some point JJ Hardy will wake up and probably bring Geoff Jenkins with him. You guys have a good team, but to think you haven't been lucky is laughable.

I don't know about lucky, Bush has pitched poorly as has Sheets to offset the other starters. Cordero has been a good closer his entire career other than April last year. While Hardy is hitting great Hall isn't hitting well at all. Jenkins just isn't facing lefties, he's an .870+ OPS guy when he does that. For every hot player the Brewers have they have a cold one too. I'd say the record is largely due to having an easy schedule though. A lot of wins against the Cardinals, Astros and Pirates who have all been just terrible this year.

98navigator · May 8, 2007

RS/RA doesn't tell you very much at this point in the season. The data set is simply too small and one game changes things too much. I am a huge Brewer fan and I don't think the Brewers are significantly better than the Cubs. I do think the Cubs pitching will collapse eventually but I don't think the Brewers will keep hitting like they are now either so they offset each other.

I have no idea what you mean by "collapse." If you are predicting that the Cubs staff will start to give up more runs as the weather gets warmer, that will be a universal trend in baseball. The warmer weather will also benefit their offense.

The Cubs staff has been pitching to conditions; they know when the flags are flying in at Wrigley Field that they can challenge hitters. However, they haven't been giving up an inordinate amount of home runs on the road (and the Cubs have played a few games in very warm conditions already). Also, I think it's foolish to discredit their pitching to this point. The weather didn't do much to aid Wade Miller's pitching.

Ted Lilly and Rich Hill are the two predominant fly ball pitchers in the rotation. Hill pitched in Wrigley Field last summer without too many issues and Lilly is smart enough to use his sinker and curve ball (strike out pitch) when the wind is blowing out. Hell, Ted Lilly has a career 4.53 ERA in the American League. His move to the NL can only be a boast to his numbers. IMO, both are capable of posting sub 4 ERAs.

Last season Jason Marquis gave up a career high 35 home runs. This season, he seemingly has rediscovered his sinker ball. I expect him to give up more runs over time but that doesn't mean he will end the year near his career worst 2006 numbers. Zambrano's increased production and, what appears to be, an improvement at the fifth starter slot, will help to offset any decline from Marquis.

None of that is a collapse...

You've already predicted that the Brewers will begin to score fewer runs but you seem to be suggesting that the team's pitching will remain constant (which is inexplicable). Dave Bush, Claudio Vargas, and Chris Capuano are all plus 4 career ERA guys who (in the case of Capuano and Vargas) are overachieving. Like Jason Marquis, expect their numbers to decline as the season progresses. Also, there is no guarantee that the bullpen won't regress and Sheets' health will continue to be a question.

The expected decline in the Brewers pitching, coupled with your own predicted decline in hitting, doesn't bode well for the future.

abuck1220 · May 8, 2007

why are people having such a hard time admitting that the brewers are better than the cubs?

because they aren't?

really? because the standings say otherwise.

unfortunately, the division winner is determined by the standings and not a position by position >/= contest. the brewers are going to have to completely collapse or suffer some serious injuries for them not to be in contention all season.

are you implying that baseball standings after a month and some change is an accurate rating system?

that's not like you, dog.

everyone wants to look at RS/RA, which is fine...the cubs should have a better record. but they don't, and those losses are in the past. it may show that the cubs can play up the level of the brewers the rest of the season, but the losses that happened (whether they mathematically should have or not) can't be changed.

even if the cubs improve and brewers get worse starting from this date, the cubs are still in a five game hole.
It's May 7th. Man I don't think anyone has came from 5 back with 130 to play. But go ahead and break your own arm patting yourself on the back about the Brewers being a good team, at least that way it will be a change from your gloating about how you knew Rich Hill was great.

seriously dude, can you point to a recent post of mine where i gloat about being right about rich hill? because i'm damn positive that people talk about how i brag about being right about rich hill far more than i actually brag about being right about rich hill.

and i never said the cubs couldn't come back from five games out. that's stupid.

i don't know why you cool aid drinking cub fans continue to assume that the teams ahead of the cubs will fall back and the cubs will surge forward...have you not followed the cubs for say, the last 100 years? if think the brewers are a losing franchise that doesn't deserve to win the division, what do you call the cubs?

illiniguy · May 8, 2007

why are people having such a hard time admitting that the brewers are better than the cubs?

because they aren't?

really? because the standings say otherwise.

unfortunately, the division winner is determined by the standings and not a position by position >/= contest. the brewers are going to have to completely collapse or suffer some serious injuries for them not to be in contention all season.

are you implying that baseball standings after a month and some change is an accurate rating system?

that's not like you, dog.

everyone wants to look at RS/RA, which is fine...the cubs should have a better record. but they don't, and those losses are in the past. it may show that the cubs can play up the level of the brewers the rest of the season, but the losses that happened (whether they mathematically should have or not) can't be changed.

even if the cubs improve and brewers get worse starting from this date, the cubs are still in a five game hole.
It's May 7th. Man I don't think anyone has came from 5 back with 130 to play. But go ahead and break your own arm patting yourself on the back about the Brewers being a good team, at least that way it will be a change from your gloating about how you knew Rich Hill was great.

seriously dude, can you point to a recent post of mine where i gloat about being right about rich hill? because i'm damn positive that people talk about how i brag about being right about rich hill far more than i actually brag about being right about rich hill.

and i never said the cubs couldn't come back from five games out. that's stupid.

i don't know why you cool aid drinking cub fans continue to assume that the teams ahead of the cubs will fall back and the cubs will surge forward...have you not followed the cubs for say, the last 100 years? if think the brewers are a losing franchise that doesn't deserve to win the division, what do you call the cubs?

I don't think that history has anything to do with their team right now, nor ours. I do think that this will be a good race. Time will tell.

98navigator · May 8, 2007

why are people having such a hard time admitting that the brewers are better than the cubs?

because they aren't?

really? because the standings say otherwise.

unfortunately, the division winner is determined by the standings and not a position by position >/= contest. the brewers are going to have to completely collapse or suffer some serious injuries for them not to be in contention all season.

are you implying that baseball standings after a month and some change is an accurate rating system?

that's not like you, dog.

everyone wants to look at RS/RA, which is fine...the cubs should have a better record. but they don't, and those losses are in the past. it may show that the cubs can play up the level of the brewers the rest of the season, but the losses that happened (whether they mathematically should have or not) can't be changed.

even if the cubs improve and brewers get worse starting from this date, the cubs are still in a five game hole.
It's May 7th. Man I don't think anyone has came from 5 back with 130 to play. But go ahead and break your own arm patting yourself on the back about the Brewers being a good team, at least that way it will be a change from your gloating about how you knew Rich Hill was great.

seriously dude, can you point to a recent post of mine where i gloat about being right about rich hill? because i'm damn positive that people talk about how i brag about being right about rich hill far more than i actually brag about being right about rich hill.

and i never said the cubs couldn't come back from five games out. that's stupid.

i don't know why you cool aid drinking cub fans continue to assume that the teams ahead of the cubs will fall back and the cubs will surge forward...have you not followed the cubs for say, the last 100 years? if think the brewers are a losing franchise that doesn't deserve to win the division, what do you call the cubs?

mmmmmm, "cool aid."

You have selective memory. The 2003 Cubs, for a variety of reasons, were able to surge forward and win the division...

Seriously, you're entitled to your opinion but there's no reason to call out people that don't agree; there's certainly more than one way to look at this thing.

BTW, since you highlighted the Cubs presumed inability to win due to their history, what about the Brewers recent history suggests that they can sustain a lead?

Absolutely nothing.

abuck1220 · May 8, 2007

neither team's history means anything.

i was responding to people who seem to be saying "oh they're the brewers, they'll blow it" as if the cubs have some kind of rich history of winning titles.

Warpticon · May 8, 2007

even if the cubs improve and brewers get worse starting from this date, the cubs are still in a five game hole.

5 GAMES! Season over.

I want to win lost game...

I want winning

itsumo...

I want to win lost game...

WHY WHY WHY WHY I want to win!

Season over.

Rob · May 8, 2007

i don't know why you cool aid drinking cub fans continue to assume that the teams ahead of the cubs will fall back and the cubs will surge forward...have you not followed the cubs for say, the last 100 years? if think the brewers are a losing franchise that doesn't deserve to win the division, what do you call the cubs?

I believe that Cubs fans have to believe other teams will fall back and we will surge forward... otherwise the last century would have killed us.

CubColtPacer · May 8, 2007

neither team's history means anything.

i was responding to people who seem to be saying "oh they're the brewers, they'll blow it" as if the cubs have some kind of rich history of winning titles.

I just re-read the thread, and other than navigator's point replying to you just above, nobody has said that the Brewers will fall just because they are the Brewers. So I'm not really sure who you're responding to.

It's time to test JJ Hardy...

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs