Re: Longest losing streaks in franchise history

[Tryptamine]

The weird thing to me is that this team is nowhere near as painful to watch as such great teams like 2002 and 2006. Cripes, 2006 felt like a forced death march compared to this season.

 

I felt this way at first, but the last couple games have been particularly painful. Tonight's game was just......

[Splendid Splinter]

The weird thing to me is that this team is nowhere near as painful to watch as such great teams like 2002 and 2006. Cripes, 2006 felt like a forced death march compared to this season.

 

I felt this way at first, but the last couple games have been particularly painful. Tonight's game was just......

 

No... 2006 was.... I'm not sure if I can put it into words. I mean... all you need to know is Pierre-Izturis. I have cochlear implants (lost my hearing that summer) and I still hear everything from that season and it haunts me to this day. The worst part of it was my brother thought they're going to WS because they got a "real" leadoff hitter in Pierre.

[MSG T]

The weird thing to me is that this team is nowhere near as painful to watch as such great teams like 2002 and 2006. Cripes, 2006 felt like a forced death march compared to this season.

 

While not the worst record I remember, 2006 is easily the worst season I can remember. It just sucked the life out of me as a fan. This year has been nowhere near the bad.

 

It started in the offseason with the thought " we traded actual living, breathing players for Pierre?" and went downhill from there.

[illiniguy]

2006 hurt a lot more because of how close we were in 03 I believe. Well that and by that point we knew we had really broke wood and prior.

[Cubswin11]

Yes we can!

[Irrelevant Dude]

Possibly more impressive than the losing streak itself, when is the last time a team has been swept consecutively by the Astros and Pirates?

[AlwaysaCub]

The Cubs are scoring 2.6 runs per game in this losing streak. Looking at the line up objectively, its amazing they started decently at all. No offense (not that the pitching has been much better)

[Soul]

Interesting that the other most terrible team in the NL shows up in time to potentially spoil history.

 

*SURELY* we can pick up a win against SD here. Come on now.

[A New Era]

Don't get your hopes down. Even bad teams have a hard time beating bad teams.

[Soul]

Heh, yeah.

[NewUserName]

I made a bet a couple of weeks ago that the Cubs would be no hit this season. I really like my chances of winning.

[Fred Hornkohl]

I made a bet a couple of weeks ago that the Cubs would be no hit this season. I really like my chances of winning.

 

CUBS are 0-1 when they get 3 hits in the game
CUBS are 1-5 when they get 5 hits in the game
CUBS are 0-9 when they get 6 hits in the game
CUBS are 1-2 when they get 7 hits in the game
CUBS are 2-6 when they get 8 hits in the game
CUBS are 2-2 when they get 9 hits in the game
CUBS are 3-4 when they get 10 hits in the game
CUBS are 1-1 when they get 11 hits in the game
CUBS are 1-1 when they get 12 hits in the game
CUBS are 2-0 when they get 13 hits in the game
CUBS are 2-0 when they get 14 hits in the game

 

Last time the CUBS were held to 3 hits in a game.... Wed 16 May 2012 in a 9-2 loss to Philadelphia at Wrigley
Last time the CUBS were held to 2 hits in a game.... Mon 26 Sep 2011 in a 2-0 loss at San Diego
Last time the CUBS were held to 1 hits in a game.... Mon 21 Sep 2009 in a 2-1 loss at Los Angeles
Last time the CUBS were held to 0 hits in a game.... Thu 09 Sep 1965 in a 1-0 loss at Los Angeles

 

Hope you got pretty good odds.

[SouthSideRyan]

Seriously, this bet, it's terrible bet.

[KaiserCesar]

The Cubs are a little worse at scoring runs (27th) than getting base hits (23rd), but I think it's at least a decent chance they get no-hit considering some of the lineups that get put out there once a couple of injuries or days off occur.

[SouthSideRyan]

The Cubs are a little worse at scoring runs (27th) than getting base hits (23rd), but I think it's at least a decent chance they get no-hit considering some of the lineups that get put out there once a couple of injuries or days off occur.

 

There is literally never a decent chance a team gets no-hit.

[manbearcub]

Don't the Mariners get no hit once every couple of weeks?

[bcl412]

Didn't the Rays get no hit a few times over a couple of years span? They've been a good offensive team for most of the past few years. I'd say no hitters pretty much happen at random and you can't really pick when they are going to happen at all.

[KaiserCesar]

The Cubs are a little worse at scoring runs (27th) than getting base hits (23rd), but I think it's at least a decent chance they get no-hit considering some of the lineups that get put out there once a couple of injuries or days off occur.

 

There is literally never a decent chance a team gets no-hit.

 

Well, I guess it means by what 'decent' is. Since 2007, there have been 18 no hitters over the course of 5 and a third seasons. The Cubs are in the bottom quarter of the league in terms of offense, so the chances are easily greater than 10% over the course of an entire season, but significantly less than that now that a third of the season is done and we are moving into summer.

[SouthSideRyan]

League average in NL is a .250 BA, the Cubs are at .244. They also never walk and rarely sacrifice (maximizing the number of PA per game that are ABs)

[KaiserCesar]

Didn't the Rays get no hit a few times over a couple of years span? They've been a good offensive team for most of the past few years. I'd say no hitters pretty much happen at random and you can't really pick when they are going to happen at all.

 

I just calculated the numbers on the no-hitters since 2007 and the average offensive rank of the teams that got no-hit was 14, so that does seem pretty random and not too dependent on team performance.

[Fred Hornkohl]

The Cubs are a little worse at scoring runs (27th) than getting base hits (23rd), but I think it's at least a decent chance they get no-hit considering some of the lineups that get put out there once a couple of injuries or days off occur.

 

There is literally never a decent chance a team gets no-hit.

 

Well, I guess it means by what 'decent' is. Since 2007, there have been 18 no hitters over the course of 5 and a third seasons. The Cubs are in the bottom quarter of the league in terms of offense, so the chances are easily greater than 10% over the course of an entire season, but significantly less than that now that a third of the season is done and we are moving into summer.

 

If the probability of the CUBS getting no-hit once during the course of any given season were "easily greater than 10%" then one could logically infer that they would have been no-hit at least once every 10 years, on average.

 

The stark reality of the situation is that 47 years (and 7,376 games) have transpired since the CUBS were last no-hit by Sandy Koufax in 1965

 

Something just doesn't add up here.

[KaiserCesar]

The Cubs are a little worse at scoring runs (27th) than getting base hits (23rd), but I think it's at least a decent chance they get no-hit considering some of the lineups that get put out there once a couple of injuries or days off occur.

 

There is literally never a decent chance a team gets no-hit.

 

Well, I guess it means by what 'decent' is. Since 2007, there have been 18 no hitters over the course of 5 and a third seasons. The Cubs are in the bottom quarter of the league in terms of offense, so the chances are easily greater than 10% over the course of an entire season, but significantly less than that now that a third of the season is done and we are moving into summer.

 

If the probability of the CUBS getting no-hit once during the course of any given season were "easily greater than 10%" then one could logically infer that they would have been no-hit at least once every 10 years, on average.

 

The stark reality of the situation is that 47 years (and 7,376 games) have transpired since the CUBS were last no-hit by Sandy Koufax in 1965

 

Something just doesn't add up here.

 

Well, the Cubs have the longest streak of avoiding no-hitters, so it's really a statistical anomaly more than anything. Also, I'm using post-2007 numbers to try to reflect the run environment a little bit. Between 2002 and 2006, only 5 no-hitters happend in comparison to the 16 between 2007 and 2012.

[Fred Hornkohl]

 

Well, the Cubs have the longest streak of avoiding no-hitters, so it's really a statistical anomaly more than anything. Also, I'm using post-2007 numbers to try to reflect the run environment a little bit. Between 2002 and 2006, only 5 no-hitters happend in comparison to the 16 between 2007 and 2012.

 

Just show me the calculation where the probability is "easily greater than 10%".

[SouthSideRyan]

No-Hitters on their own are a statistical anomaly. Taking a cursory glance, I'm not sure run environment makes much of a difference. You're working so far on the margins when it comes to them, that a league average BA being 10 points lower barely even registers.

[KaiserCesar]

 

Well, the Cubs have the longest streak of avoiding no-hitters, so it's really a statistical anomaly more than anything. Also, I'm using post-2007 numbers to try to reflect the run environment a little bit. Between 2002 and 2006, only 5 no-hitters happend in comparison to the 16 between 2007 and 2012.

 

Just show me the calculation where the probability is "easily greater than 10%".

 

Well, the average no-hit avoidance streak is currently 10.86 years, so I don't think it's too far out of line using the rationale you used. Here's the data I used on that one.

 

orioles - 2007 - 5

yankees - 2003 - 9

blue jays - 2011 - 1

red sox - 1993 - 19

indians - 2011 - 1

white sox - 2011 - 1

tigers - 2010 - 2

royals - 2008 - 4

twins - 2012 - 0

rangers - 2007 - 5

angels - 1999 - 13

a's - 1991 - 21

mariners - 2012 - 0

nationals/expos - 1999 - 13

mets - 1993 - 19

braves - 2010 - 2

phillies - 1978 - 34

reds - 2010 - 2

cardinals - 1990 - 22

astros - 2008 - 4

brewers - 2007 - 5

cubs - 1965 - 47

pirates - 1971 - 41

dodgers - 1994 - 18

giants - 2003 - 9

padres - 2009 - 3

diamondbacks - 2006 - 6

rays - 2010 - 2

rockies - 1996 - 16

marlins - 2010 - 2

 

The original 10% was a very quick and dirty calculation I did on the fly assuming there being 3+ no-hitters per year and a 1 out of 30 chance of it being one specific team each time. I skewed it upward due to the offensive woes of the Cubs, even though the runs scored of teams that have been no-hit suggests that that doesn't really matter too much.