40 Games to Play

[Guest]

They topped out at 32 games during both the 1984 and 1969 seasons.

[Coach C]

So, what are the magic numbers for the Cubs?

[otis89]

So, what are the magic numbers for the Cubs?

 

24 for a playoff spot. 28 for the division.

[FergieJ31]

Between 33 and 42 over you have to go back to '45,

 

Between 43 and 48 you have to go back to Charlie Grimm's '35 team,

 

Between 49 and 53, 1910

 

Between 54 and the all-time high 80, it's ... hey, did ESPN or anyone ever realize this is the 100 year anniversary?

[FergieJ31]

So, what are the magic numbers for the Cubs?

 

24 for a playoff spot. 28 for the division.

 

24 is the Stl number -- I think the 2nd place NL East team (Phils or Mets) has an excellent chance of passing the Cards before a clinch date, so 24 is a little misleading.

[bukie]

So, what are the magic numbers for the Cubs?

 

24 for a playoff spot. 28 for the division.

 

24 is the Stl number -- I think the 2nd place NL East team (Phils or Mets) has an excellent chance of passing the Cards before a clinch date, so 24 is a little misleading.

 

It's lower than 24 for the Phils, so 24 is accurate for the time being.

[FergieJ31]

So, what are the magic numbers for the Cubs?

 

24 for a playoff spot. 28 for the division.

 

24 is the Stl number -- I think the 2nd place NL East team (Phils or Mets) has an excellent chance of passing the Cards before a clinch date, so 24 is a little misleading.

 

It's lower than 24 for the Phils, so 24 is accurate for the time being.

 

Sure it's accurate, but my point is there's obviously a difference between a magic # to eliminate a team with no competition, compared to the same magic # to eliminate a team with a very good team right on their tail.

 

Any bond future traders out there will recognize this effect as the cheapest to deliver option in T-bond futures. Right now Stl is the "cheapest to deliver" bond, but the 2nd cheapest bond (Phil) is a close 2nd, and it significantly affects pricing.

[biittner77]

Sure it's accurate, but my point is there's obviously a difference between a magic # to eliminate a team with no competition, compared to the same magic # to eliminate a team with a very good team right on their tail.

 

Any bond future traders out there will recognize this effect as the cheapest to deliver option in T-bond futures. Right now Stl is the "cheapest to deliver" bond, but the 2nd cheapest bond (Phil) is a close 2nd, and it significantly affects pricing.

 

The big difference being that any Cub win reduces the magic number regardless of what other teams do.

[NCCubFan]

So, what are the magic numbers for the Cubs?

Just check my signature.

[DivineBovine]

I sure hope they have a cushion going into the last few weeks, because the Cubs have BY FAR the toughest schedule at the end of the season.

 

In the last 19 games:

 

3 at St. Louis

3 at Houston

3 vs Milwaukee

3 vs St Louis

4 at NY Mets

3 at Milwaukee

 

Every team with a winning record, every team except Houston playing for something.

 

I have to say, I'm a little concerned. They'd better build a lead.

[Ski]

I sure hope they have a cushion going into the last few weeks, because the Cubs have BY FAR the toughest schedule at the end of the season.

 

In the last 19 games:

 

3 at St. Louis

3 at Houston

3 vs Milwaukee

3 vs St Louis

4 at NY Mets

3 at Milwaukee

 

Every team with a winning record, every team except Houston playing for something.

 

I have to say, I'm a little concerned. They'd better build a lead.

The Cubs have shown they can beat good teams. Let's ust hope they don't choke and we can keep winning series.

[CubsBears29]

I sure hope they have a cushion going into the last few weeks, because the Cubs have BY FAR the toughest schedule at the end of the season.

 

In the last 19 games:

 

3 at St. Louis

3 at Houston

3 vs Milwaukee

3 vs St Louis

4 at NY Mets

3 at Milwaukee

 

Every team with a winning record, every team except Houston playing for something.

 

I have to say, I'm a little concerned. They'd better build a lead.

 

That's an understandable concern, but the Cubs' current winning % and trends indicate that a 20-12 run & final 100-62 record is quite possible. The bulk of those wins will have to come early in the remaining 32, to ensure getting to 100+ wins, but the Cubs can do it.

 

If we go 20-12 in remaining games, the Brewers would have to finish 25-6 to win the division and Cards/Phillies WC winner would have to go something like 28-2 and 30-2 respectively to keep us out of the playoffs.

 

Even if you scale it back to 16-16/96-66, Brewers need to go 21-10 to win Central, and StL/PHI WC need to go 24-6 & 26-6 respectively to keep us home this October.

 

Even going 16-16, good luck to StL or PHI keeping us out of the 2008 Playoffs.

[David]

Are the games against St. Louis and Houston supposed to worry us?

 

That's why I hate that whole "they're facing x many games vs. teams over .500."

 

The Cards have been a very mediocre team for months now and the Astros aren't any better.

 

Am I saying they can't or won't lose to them? No. But I'm not worried about those opponents any more than I'd worry about any other random team.

[third eye]

So, what are the magic numbers for the Cubs?

 

24 for a playoff spot. 28 for the division.

 

24 is the Stl number -- I think the 2nd place NL East team (Phils or Mets) has an excellent chance of passing the Cards before a clinch date, so 24 is a little misleading.

 

It's lower than 24 for the Phils, so 24 is accurate for the time being.

 

Sure it's accurate, but my point is there's obviously a difference between a magic # to eliminate a team with no competition, compared to the same magic # to eliminate a team with a very good team right on their tail.

 

Any bond future traders out there will recognize this effect as the cheapest to deliver option in T-bond futures. Right now Stl is the "cheapest to deliver" bond, but the 2nd cheapest bond (Phil) is a close 2nd, and it significantly affects pricing.

 

Didn't LTCM place a big leveraged arb bet on the the cheapest to deliver spreads for Russian bonds in 1997/1998? that arb didnt work out so well for them if I recall :-"

[Fro]

The big key to winning the division is going at least .500 the rest of the way, and especially in the Brewers series.

 

If we can at least split those 6 games in that series, the math starts getting a lot better.

[rawaction]

The big key to winning the division is going at least .500 the rest of the way, and especially in the Brewers series.

 

If we can at least split those 6 games in that series, the math starts getting a lot better.

 

The last 3 games against the Brewers won't matter. The Cubs will clinch the division before then.

[big_shooter17]

Cubs and Cardinals sweeps could put those numbers down to 22 and 21 respectively, which would be quite nice. I know that the schedules don't perfectly line up to look at it like that, but essentially that would be the net effect.

[CubinNY]

They topped out at 32 games during both the 1984 and 1969 seasons.

I'm not superstitious, but I'd prefer that they get above 32 games or at 30 or 31 games above 500.

 

I was less than one year old in 69, but I remember 1984. Those 2 didn't end so well.

[Soul]

They topped out at 32 games during both the 1984 and 1969 seasons.

I'm not superstitious, but I'd prefer that they get above 32 games or at 30 or 31 games above 500.

 

I was less than one year old in 69, but I remember 1984. Those 2 didn't end so well.

 

It can't happen again. My heart can't take it this time. I was younger in '84, able to recover. Now? Wounds like that might take me out.

[DivineBovine]

Are the games against St. Louis and Houston supposed to worry us?

 

That's why I hate that whole "they're facing x many games vs. teams over .500."

 

The Cards have been a very mediocre team for months now and the Astros aren't any better.

 

Am I saying they can't or won't lose to them? No. But I'm not worried about those opponents any more than I'd worry about any other random team.

 

 

What worries me is that they are playing teams that care about winning. Teams that will be playing for their playoff lives. That makes more a difference than anything. Uh, how can you possibly say that you don't care if you're playing whether against a team that wants to win at all costs or bunch of minor league call ups and journeymen?

[Fred Hornkohl]

They topped out at 32 games during both the 1984 and 1969 seasons.

I'm not superstitious, but I'd prefer that they get above 32 games or at 30 or 31 games above 500.

 

I was less than one year old in 69, but I remember 1984. Those 2 didn't end so well.

 

It can't happen again. My heart can't take it this time. I was younger in '84, able to recover. Now? Wounds like that might take me out.

 

Oh ?? :shock:

[Jehrico]

Are the games against St. Louis and Houston supposed to worry us?

 

That's why I hate that whole "they're facing x many games vs. teams over .500."

 

The Cards have been a very mediocre team for months now and the Astros aren't any better.

 

Am I saying they can't or won't lose to them? No. But I'm not worried about those opponents any more than I'd worry about any other random team.

 

 

What worries me is that they are playing teams that care about winning. Teams that will be playing for their playoff lives. That makes more a difference than anything. Uh, how can you possibly say that you don't care if you're playing whether against a team that wants to win at all costs or bunch of minor league call ups and journeymen?

Considering our penchant for playing up or down to the competition, this might be a good thing.

[Soul]

They topped out at 32 games during both the 1984 and 1969 seasons.

I'm not superstitious, but I'd prefer that they get above 32 games or at 30 or 31 games above 500.

 

I was less than one year old in 69, but I remember 1984. Those 2 didn't end so well.

 

It can't happen again. My heart can't take it this time. I was younger in '84, able to recover. Now? Wounds like that might take me out.

 

Oh ?? :shock:

Let's put it this way. In '03, I got complaints from neighbors about the noise during games. Really, I'm ridiculous when it comes to the Cubs and playoffs, especially when I think they *should* win something.

[UMFan83]

So, what are the magic numbers for the Cubs?

 

24 for a playoff spot. 28 for the division.

 

24 is the Stl number -- I think the 2nd place NL East team (Phils or Mets) has an excellent chance of passing the Cards before a clinch date, so 24 is a little misleading.

 

It's lower than 24 for the Phils, so 24 is accurate for the time being.

 

Sure it's accurate, but my point is there's obviously a difference between a magic # to eliminate a team with no competition, compared to the same magic # to eliminate a team with a very good team right on their tail.

 

Any bond future traders out there will recognize this effect as the cheapest to deliver option in T-bond futures. Right now Stl is the "cheapest to deliver" bond, but the 2nd cheapest bond (Phil) is a close 2nd, and it significantly affects pricing.

 

I think your missing the point though. Any combination of 24 Cubs wins and/or 2nd place in WC teams losses = Cubs clinch playoffs. If the Phillies pass the Cardinals (and I will point out the Cardinals are still playing good baseball and just got Wainright back), they will assume the role as 2nd place in WC and will assume the role of lowering the Cubs magic number with each loss.

[CubmanPi]

They topped out at 32 games during both the 1984 and 1969 seasons.

I'm not superstitious, but I'd prefer that they get above 32 games or at 30 or 31 games above 500.

 

I was less than one year old in 69, but I remember 1984. Those 2 didn't end so well.

 

It can't happen again. My heart can't take it this time. I was younger in '84, able to recover. Now? Wounds like that might take me out.

 

Oh ?? :shock:

Is that loss to the '35 Tigers still fresh in your memory?