Steve Rosenbloom is a moron (Updated 6/2/08)

[Jon]

The real question is why someone would read that in the first place.

[champaignchris]

The Cubs' record might be inflated due to where they've played, with 11 or 12 more on the road than at home.

 

(Oddly though, if recent history is any indication, the Cubs' haven't had much of a home field advantage. During the last few seasons, they've had nearly identical home and road records -3 game difference last year, 6 games difference in 2006, 3 games better on the road in 2005, 1 game difference in 2004, same record in 2003 - that's a total of only 7 games better record at home over a five year period. That indicates to me that although their torrid pace at home is going to fall off, they are in all likelihood going to start winning more games on the road.)

 

However, their record isn't inflated due to who they've played. The Cubs' opponents' win% is just under .500 and ranks 13th in the Majors. The Cardinals' opponents' win% is .489 and ranks 27th in the majors.

 

There are legitimate reasons to suspect that the Cubs might not be as good as their record indicates. A good sportswriter would have written about them rather than made stuff up.

[jyoung55]

What I don't get is why anyone could think that being 1 game below 500 on the road with this sample size means anything. I even heard ESPN refer to it as "the chink in the Cubs armor."

 

There are only FOUR teams in the majors with above 500 records on the road and only the Angels and Phillies are better than 1 game over.

[Fred Hornkohl]

What I don't get is why anyone could think that being 1 game below 500 on the road with this sample size means anything. I even heard ESPN refer to it as "the chink in the Cubs armor."

 

There are only FOUR teams in the majors with above 500 records on the road and only the Angels and Phillies are better than 1 game over.

 

CUBS are actually 3 games below .500 on the road (10-13), but your point is well taken, just the same.

[CubinNY]

What I don't get is why anyone could think that being 1 game below 500 on the road with this sample size means anything. I even heard ESPN refer to it as "the chink in the Cubs armor."

 

There are only FOUR teams in the majors with above 500 records on the road and only the Angels and Phillies are better than 1 game over.

 

CUBS are actually 3 games below .500 on the road (10-13), but your point is well taken, just the same.

 

Right. The Cubs have done exactly what a good team is supposed to do, beat up on the bad teams. For the first time in my life I have faith in this team. They are going to keep winning.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

It's been mentioned before, but the Cubs are actually outscoring teams on the road. If that continues, they'll end up a couple games above .500 on the road, which very, very few teams did last year.

[XZero771679666304]

It's been mentioned before, but the Cubs are actually outscoring teams on the road. If that continues, they'll end up a couple games above .500 on the road, which very, very few teams did last year.

 

Yeah, there have definitely been some "should have won" games on the road.

 

The home winning percentage will come down, the road will go up.

[javy knows my name]

Boy he's trying to top himself every week. After bashing the Cubs for playing weak schedule, he comes up with this fine piece of journalism...

 

When you've played the Pirates and a whole bunch of the NL West, then you ought to have the best record in baseball, but look out, the Cardinals are only 2½ games behind. I still can't figure out how, and that's what worries me. There are reasons to feel great about the Cubs—the starting pitching, the bullpen, the way the offense can come back—but we expected a first-place team. We did not expect the Cardinals to be this close. At least, I didn't. I mean, they've on the verge of starting their seventh rookie pitcher this season.

 

I read the bold and immediately thought whaaaaaa??? They don't have a rookie in their rotation, and surely they aren't replacing one of their starters right now...

 

What Steve was TRYING to say is that this is the 7th Cardinals rookie (position or pitcher) to make their debut this season. Way to just completely butcher the facts Steve.

Maybe he uses "pitcher" to refer to any player the way some people use "Coke" to mean any soda. :D

I've never heard anyone do this, ever.

[Sammy Sofa]

Boy he's trying to top himself every week. After bashing the Cubs for playing weak schedule, he comes up with this fine piece of journalism...

 

When you've played the Pirates and a whole bunch of the NL West, then you ought to have the best record in baseball, but look out, the Cardinals are only 2½ games behind. I still can't figure out how, and that's what worries me. There are reasons to feel great about the Cubs—the starting pitching, the bullpen, the way the offense can come back—but we expected a first-place team. We did not expect the Cardinals to be this close. At least, I didn't. I mean, they've on the verge of starting their seventh rookie pitcher this season.

 

I read the bold and immediately thought whaaaaaa??? They don't have a rookie in their rotation, and surely they aren't replacing one of their starters right now...

 

What Steve was TRYING to say is that this is the 7th Cardinals rookie (position or pitcher) to make their debut this season. Way to just completely butcher the facts Steve.

Maybe he uses "pitcher" to refer to any player the way some people use "Coke" to mean any soda. :D

I've never heard anyone do this, ever.

 

It's a southern thing.

[Exile on Waveland]

Boy he's trying to top himself every week. After bashing the Cubs for playing weak schedule, he comes up with this fine piece of journalism...

 

When you've played the Pirates and a whole bunch of the NL West, then you ought to have the best record in baseball, but look out, the Cardinals are only 2½ games behind. I still can't figure out how, and that's what worries me. There are reasons to feel great about the Cubs—the starting pitching, the bullpen, the way the offense can come back—but we expected a first-place team. We did not expect the Cardinals to be this close. At least, I didn't. I mean, they've on the verge of starting their seventh rookie pitcher this season.

 

I read the bold and immediately thought whaaaaaa??? They don't have a rookie in their rotation, and surely they aren't replacing one of their starters right now...

 

What Steve was TRYING to say is that this is the 7th Cardinals rookie (position or pitcher) to make their debut this season. Way to just completely butcher the facts Steve.

Maybe he uses "pitcher" to refer to any player the way some people use "Coke" to mean any soda. :D

I've never heard anyone do this, ever.

 

You've never been to Southern Indiana then. I do it; it may make no sense, but every soda is a Coke here (well, it's not that bad in Bloomington).

 

It's not uncommon for a waiter-patron conversation to go: "I'll take a Coke." "What kind?" "Diet Mountain Dew."

[NCCubFan]

What I don't get is why anyone could think that being 1 game below 500 on the road with this sample size means anything. I even heard ESPN refer to it as "the chink in the Cubs armor."

 

There are only FOUR teams in the majors with above 500 records on the road and only the Angels and Phillies are better than 1 game over.

 

CUBS are actually 3 games below .500 on the road (10-13), but your point is well taken, just the same.

Make that 2 games below.

[Fred Hornkohl]

What I don't get is why anyone could think that being 1 game below 500 on the road with this sample size means anything. I even heard ESPN refer to it as "the chink in the Cubs armor."

 

There are only FOUR teams in the majors with above 500 records on the road and only the Angels and Phillies are better than 1 game over.

 

CUBS are actually 3 games below .500 on the road (10-13), but your point is well taken, just the same.

Make that 2 games below.

 

.... and counting......