If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Sports)   The best record in baseball is owned by the traditional baseball powerhouses - the Reds and the Nats   (cbssports.com) divider line 68
    More: Unlikely, reds, Francisco Liriano, longest winning streaks, Ryan Ludwick, Brandon Phillips, Johnny Cueto, Walt Jocketty, Mike Leake  
•       •       •

456 clicks; posted to Sports » on 30 Jul 2012 at 12:14 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-30 12:00:53 PM
Well sure - they get to play mostly NL teams all season.
 
2012-07-30 12:09:48 PM
The Reds have been an historically good franchise. They aren't perenially at the top, but they do field a contender 2 or 3 times a decade.
 
2012-07-30 12:17:29 PM
Good for them. Both teams deserve it.
I'm sure the yanks will pick it back up.
 
2012-07-30 12:24:40 PM
These guys all have a great big bag of fark you for subby
i110.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-30 12:27:05 PM
I get a kick out of how someone like Drew Stubbs is, to the Reds management, frustratingly inconsistent and a big reason why they're poking around at acquiring a Shane Victorino.

Put Drew Stubbs on the Mariners however and he'd easily be one of their best players.
 
2012-07-30 12:27:05 PM

Crewmannumber6: These guys all have a great big bag of fark you for subby
[i110.photobucket.com image 432x343]


This. They weren't called the Big Red Machine for naught.
 
2012-07-30 12:33:19 PM
Quick, name the Nationals' best starter. No peeking!
 
2012-07-30 12:34:52 PM
At least no one's trying to feed the "oldest team" crap in this thread.

\no, the Reds are not the oldest team, the original Reds disbanded and formed what is now the Atlanta Braves in 1871
\these Reds are 11 years younger
 
2012-07-30 12:36:25 PM

Wellon Dowd: Quick, name the Nationals' best starter. No peeking!


Hmm, Gonzalez? Zimmerman? Detwiler? Jackson? Did I miss anyone?
 
2012-07-30 12:37:21 PM

MAYORBOB: Crewmannumber6: These guys all have a great big bag of fark you for subby
[i110.photobucket.com image 432x343]

This. They weren't called the Big Red Machine for naught.


I remember the 1972 Oakland A's tuning up The Big Red Machine.

/Gene Tenace, FTW
 
2012-07-30 12:38:44 PM

Galloping Galoshes: Wellon Dowd: Quick, name the Nationals' best starter. No peeking!

Hmm, Gonzalez? Zimmerman? Detwiler? Jackson? Did I miss anyone?


Stras?

Also, depends how you define 'best'
 
2012-07-30 12:38:56 PM

FriarReb98: At least no one's trying to feed the "oldest team" crap in this thread.

\no, the Reds are not the oldest team, the original Reds disbanded and formed what is now the Atlanta Braves in 1871
\these Reds are 11 years younger


I didn't know that. The College of William and Mary claims to be the second oldest university in North America, but they conveniently ignore the seven-year period in the 1880's when there was no faculty or student body.
 
2012-07-30 12:39:19 PM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: I remember the 1972 Oakland A's tuning up The Big Red Machine.

/Gene Tenace, FTW


I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.


/Jose muhfarkin' Rijo, FTW
 
2012-07-30 12:40:14 PM

LucklessWonder: Galloping Galoshes: Wellon Dowd: Quick, name the Nationals' best starter. No peeking!

Hmm, Gonzalez? Zimmerman? Detwiler? Jackson? Did I miss anyone?

Stras?

Also, depends how you define 'best'


WAR so far this season. And the answer is Zimmermann. The Nats top four all rank in the top 18 in the NL.
 
2012-07-30 12:42:07 PM
ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?
 
2012-07-30 12:42:22 PM

Killer Cars: I get a kick out of how someone like Drew Stubbs is, to the Reds management, frustratingly inconsistent and a big reason why they're poking around at acquiring a Shane Victorino.

Put Drew Stubbs on the Mariners however and he'd easily be one of their best players.


Please take him. Take him straight away. The Reds are a little low on boneheads on that team.
 
2012-07-30 12:42:51 PM
Thank you for reminding me to look at the standings, submitter.

Yes, the Royals are in last place. It might have taken until July, but they got there. Persistence pays off.

/Facepalm
//At least we're not Houston
 
2012-07-30 12:44:22 PM

EyeballKid: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: I remember the 1972 Oakland A's tuning up The Big Red Machine.

/Gene Tenace, FTW

I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.


/Jose muhfarkin' Rijo, FTW


I believe an "Oh, SNAP" is warranted in this case. Can I get a second?
 
2012-07-30 12:46:02 PM

FriarReb98: At least no one's trying to feed the "oldest team" crap in this thread.

\no, the Reds are not the oldest team, the original Reds disbanded and formed what is now the Atlanta Braves in 1871
\these Reds are 11 years younger


Who gets credit for the Cleveland Browns NFL championships then? The Ravens?
 
2012-07-30 12:46:37 PM

LucklessWonder: Galloping Galoshes: Wellon Dowd: Quick, name the Nationals' best starter. No peeking!

Hmm, Gonzalez? Zimmerman? Detwiler? Jackson? Did I miss anyone?

Stras?

Also, depends how you define 'best'


I was being facetious.

/Did I miss Chen Ming Wang? I avoided him the way his pitches avoid the strikezone. But the question was "best."
 
2012-07-30 12:46:57 PM

EyeballKid: I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.


Also noteworthy for be the last playoff win the reds have, so yeah the reds havent been relevent for a good long while.

/the pirates won playoff games in 92
//damn im old
 
2012-07-30 12:48:49 PM

farbekrieg: EyeballKid: I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.

Also noteworthy for being the last playoff win the reds have, so yeah the reds havent been relevent for a good long while.

/the pirates won playoff games in 92
//damn im old


sigh ftfm

/need more coffee... or less i forget how that works with me
 
2012-07-30 12:49:13 PM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?


ESPN puts being the Yankees or Red Sox above any other team whatsoever usually, no matter how good their team actually is.
 
2012-07-30 12:52:44 PM

The Muthaship: FriarReb98: At least no one's trying to feed the "oldest team" crap in this thread.

\no, the Reds are not the oldest team, the original Reds disbanded and formed what is now the Atlanta Braves in 1871
\these Reds are 11 years younger

Who gets credit for the Cleveland Browns NFL championships then? The Ravens?


The Browns still own those because the franchise itself didn't relocate to Baltimore, the players and personnel were just transplanted into a new franchise while the Browns franchise was deactivated.
 
2012-07-30 12:54:24 PM

CavalierEternal: The Muthaship: FriarReb98: At least no one's trying to feed the "oldest team" crap in this thread.

\no, the Reds are not the oldest team, the original Reds disbanded and formed what is now the Atlanta Braves in 1871
\these Reds are 11 years younger

Who gets credit for the Cleveland Browns NFL championships then? The Ravens?

The Browns still own those because the franchise itself didn't relocate to Baltimore, the players and personnel were just transplanted into a new franchise while the Browns franchise was deactivated.


Thanks, was about to say something like this. The closest thing in the NFL would be the long, screwy background of the Colts trying to trace themselves back to pre-NFL days.
 
2012-07-30 12:56:16 PM
So, the Reds that were the first professional team may well still be the Reds located in Cincinnati. We just aren't privy to the wording on the paperwork back then?
 
2012-07-30 12:57:19 PM

Gonz: EyeballKid: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: I remember the 1972 Oakland A's tuning up The Big Red Machine.

/Gene Tenace, FTW

I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.


/Jose muhfarkin' Rijo, FTW

I believe an "Oh, SNAP" is warranted in this case. Can I get a second?


Uh, no. The Big Red Machine was a '70s construct. No one on that team was on the Reds in 1990. Two different eras.
 
2012-07-30 12:57:30 PM
Grew up in a baseball-mad house. Huge Reds fan as a kid, live near DC now. I can name 2 guys total from both teams (no Reds). I guess my transition to something below a casual fan of stick-and-ball sports is now complete.
 
2012-07-30 01:02:03 PM

CavalierEternal: The Muthaship: FriarReb98: At least no one's trying to feed the "oldest team" crap in this thread.

\no, the Reds are not the oldest team, the original Reds disbanded and formed what is now the Atlanta Braves in 1871
\these Reds are 11 years younger

Who gets credit for the Cleveland Browns NFL championships then? The Ravens?

The Browns still own those because the franchise itself didn't relocate to Baltimore, the players and personnel were just transplanted into a new franchise while the Browns franchise was deactivated.


Look at it more like the Jets/Yotes thing in the NHL. The retired numbers for Phoenix include Jets players even though there now is another team called the Jets back in Winnipeg (the former Thrashers).
 
2012-07-30 01:04:30 PM

machoprogrammer: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?

ESPN puts being the Yankees or Red Sox above any other team whatsoever usually, no matter how good their team actually is.


this. no matter whats going on with the teams.

and im a yanks fan. gotta give other teams love too tho
 
2012-07-30 01:04:45 PM

phyrkrakr: CavalierEternal: The Muthaship: FriarReb98: At least no one's trying to feed the "oldest team" crap in this thread.

\no, the Reds are not the oldest team, the original Reds disbanded and formed what is now the Atlanta Braves in 1871
\these Reds are 11 years younger

Who gets credit for the Cleveland Browns NFL championships then? The Ravens?

The Browns still own those because the franchise itself didn't relocate to Baltimore, the players and personnel were just transplanted into a new franchise while the Browns franchise was deactivated.

Look at it more like the Jets/Yotes thing in the NHL. The retired numbers for Phoenix include Jets players even though there now is another team called the Jets back in Winnipeg (the former Thrashers).


We still own all of our retired numbers and history, though. The only thing connecting the Ravens to the pre-'99 Browns now is Ozzie Newsome in the front office.
 
2012-07-30 01:12:16 PM

ThatGuyGreg: Well sure - they get to play mostly NL teams all season.


Ding!
 
2012-07-30 01:44:14 PM

farbekrieg: EyeballKid: I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.

Also noteworthy for be the last playoff win the reds have, so yeah the reds havent been relevent for a good long while.

/the pirates won playoff games in 92
//damn im old


The Reds made it to the NLCS in 1995, and made the playoffs in 2010.
 
2012-07-30 01:56:27 PM
Got my tickets to the pirates series this weekend. Go reds.

Haters gonna hate. Should be #1 in the power rankings.

/but seriously, getting to feast on shiatty shiatty teams while Votto is out has been a godsend.
 
2012-07-30 02:01:11 PM

machoprogrammer: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?

ESPN puts being the Yankees or Red Sox above any other team whatsoever usually, no matter how good their team actually is.


Agreed, the rankings are a joke. The Yanks and Sawks are always put at the top. They could lose 6 games in a week, but they'd still hold their spot on the grounds that "This team is loaded! And ready to make a move!" Meanwhile, whoever the #3 team is could've just swept 3 straight series but get dropped a spot because "The recent winning streak simply isn't sustainable"

/Yes, the Reds got hosed on the rankings
// Pirates fan who WANTS the Reds to lose some more games
/// Still remembers the late summers of 1990-1992 with a mixture of fondness and nausea
 
2012-07-30 02:05:50 PM

LTRM35A2: machoprogrammer: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?

ESPN puts being the Yankees or Red Sox above any other team whatsoever usually, no matter how good their team actually is.

Agreed, the rankings are a joke. The Yanks and Sawks are always put at the top. They could lose 6 games in a week, but they'd still hold their spot on the grounds that "This team is loaded! And ready to make a move!" Meanwhile, whoever the #3 team is could've just swept 3 straight series but get dropped a spot because "The recent winning streak simply isn't sustainable"

/Yes, the Reds got hosed on the rankings
// Pirates fan who WANTS the Reds to lose some more games
/// Still remembers the late summers of 1990-1992 with a mixture of fondness and nausea


you should make the trip this weekend, it's also the goetta fest in newport! You'll only get heckled a little, and I've heard pirates fans can take a little heckling, unlike cardinals fans, those guys get reallllll mad real quick.
 
2012-07-30 02:11:10 PM
I really hope they don't deal anybody for a true lead-off man. Don't fark up the chemistry, this thing is actually working right now.
 
2012-07-30 02:13:51 PM

EyeballKid: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: I remember the 1972 Oakland A's tuning up The Big Red Machine.

/Gene Tenace, FTW

I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.


/Jose muhfarkin' Rijo, FTW


Uhhh, I have some bad news for you.... The guy had a nasty slider, too bad his elbow couldn't take it. I guess one has to pay the bills somehow when your pitching arm gives out.

Link

Jose Rijo, who became a major baseball star when playing with the Cincinnati Reds, was formally charged by the DR judicial authorities in the death last year of TV commentator Jose Silvestre. Rijo, along with seven others, is also charged with money laundering activities. Silvestre was kidnapped and subsequently murdered in July 2011. Rijo, along with Matias Avelino Javier (who is on the run), head the list of persons formally charged in the murder
 
2012-07-30 02:17:17 PM

CavalierEternal: We still own all of our retired numbers and history, though. The only thing connecting the Ravens to the pre-'99 Browns now is Ozzie Newsome in the front office.


Yeah, I was saying the Reds/Braves thing was more like Yotes/Jets than Browns/Ravens.
 
2012-07-30 02:19:00 PM

AstroZombies: EyeballKid: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: I remember the 1972 Oakland A's tuning up The Big Red Machine.

/Gene Tenace, FTW

I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.


/Jose muhfarkin' Rijo, FTW

Uhhh, I have some bad news for you.... The guy had a nasty slider, too bad his elbow couldn't take it. I guess one has to pay the bills somehow when your pitching arm gives out.

Link

Jose Rijo, who became a major baseball star when playing with the Cincinnati Reds, was formally charged by the DR judicial authorities in the death last year of TV commentator Jose Silvestre. Rijo, along with seven others, is also charged with money laundering activities. Silvestre was kidnapped and subsequently murdered in July 2011. Rijo, along with Matias Avelino Javier (who is on the run), head the list of persons formally charged in the murder


Holy farking shiat!
 
2012-07-30 02:19:38 PM
I fully expect the Nats to win the Super Bowl this year.
 
2012-07-30 02:22:29 PM

LTRM35A2: /Yes, the Reds got hosed on the rankings
// Pirates fan who WANTS the Reds to lose some more games
/// Still remembers the late summers of 1990-1992 with a mixture of fondness and nausea



I've liked the Pirates since 1971, when they helped me win a $1.00 bet with my dad after being down 2 games to 0, in the World Series.

/Roberto Clemente, FTW
//wish ya luck!
 
2012-07-30 02:24:14 PM

farkingismybusiness: I fully expect the Nats to win the Super Bowl this year.


They have a better chance than do the Redskins.
 
2012-07-30 02:32:56 PM

LTRM35A2: machoprogrammer: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?

ESPN puts being the Yankees or Red Sox above any other team whatsoever usually, no matter how good their team actually is.

Agreed, the rankings are a joke. ***snip***


Can't be all bad, the Brewers are 24...sob...
 
2012-07-30 02:35:21 PM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?


Your first problem is reading BSPN.

Your second problem is you think that BSPN actually cares about anybody besides the New Boston YankSox.

Your third problem is that this isn't college football. They'll actually get their opportunity to prove it in a real postseason, whether BSPN likes it or not.
 
2012-07-30 02:39:49 PM

12349876: farbekrieg: EyeballKid: I remember the 1990 Reds sweeping the Bash Brothers.

Also noteworthy for be the last playoff win the reds have, so yeah the reds havent been relevent for a good long while.

/the pirates won playoff games in 92
//damn im old

The Reds made it to the NLCS in 1995, and made the playoffs in 2010.


indeed my brain thought that 95 appearance was a divisional round sweep to the braves (its been awhile) and the 2010 appearance did register but was indeed a sweep.
 
2012-07-30 02:48:08 PM

buckeyebrain: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?

Your first problem is reading BSPN.

Your second problem is you think that BSPN actually cares about anybody besides the New Boston YankSox.

Your third problem is that this isn't college football. They'll actually get their opportunity to prove it in a real postseason, whether BSPN likes it or not.


You know what? You're three-for-three. I can't even argue.

/go A's!
 
2012-07-30 03:13:25 PM
I did go see the Pirates and Reds at PNC last year, it was a good game. We were winning, for 8 and 1/3 innings at least........


/Curse you Joel "cardiac closer" Hanrahan!
//And shave that beard, you look like an escapee from an Amish barn raising detail
 
2012-07-30 04:37:22 PM
Go Natinals!

www.examiner.com

/actually a Nats fan
 
2012-07-30 04:37:59 PM
What is this with the Pirates and Orioles both having winning seasons and in August?
 
2012-07-30 05:02:42 PM

stpickrell: What is this with the Pirates and Orioles both having winning seasons and in August?


This year they're going to party like it's 1979?
 
2012-07-30 05:47:38 PM
farm4.static.flickr.com

Worst record in baseball

/let teddy win!
 
2012-07-30 06:44:36 PM

Junco Partner: Go Natinals!

[www.examiner.com image 351x512]

/actually a Nats fan bandwagoner

 
2012-07-30 06:46:21 PM

LTRM35A2: machoprogrammer: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ESPN just shiat all over Cincinnati, though. They have a ten game win streak. Last week's power rankings: #4. This week? #4. Does anyone there follow sports?

ESPN puts being the Yankees or Red Sox above any other team whatsoever usually, no matter how good their team actually is.

Agreed, the rankings are a joke. The Yanks and Sawks are always put at the top. They could lose 6 games in a week, but they'd still hold their spot on the grounds that "This team is loaded! And ready to make a move!" Meanwhile, whoever the #3 team is could've just swept 3 straight series but get dropped a spot because "The recent winning streak simply isn't sustainable"

/Yes, the Reds got hosed on the rankings
// Pirates fan who WANTS the Reds to lose some more games
/// Still remembers the late summers of 1990-1992 with a mixture of fondness and nausea


I'm basically a Yankee hater, but the Reds are 26-10 against teams 10 or more games under 500. The Yankees are 18-8 against losing teams. The Reds have as many wins against the truly awful teams in the league as the Yankes have games against teams under .500. The Reds are 26-24 against teams .500 or over. The Yankees are 42-33 against teams .500 or over. The Reds swept three straight series against the 45-56 ice cold (1-9) brewers, the AA Corpus Christi Hooks and the 37-63 Rockies. I think fourth is a generous ranking for the Reds.
 
2012-07-30 07:44:18 PM

scandalrag: think fourth is a generous ranking for the Reds


And yet, the Reds took the series against the Yankees this year 2 out of 3, in NY.
 
2012-07-30 08:17:49 PM

Chakro: scandalrag: think fourth is a generous ranking for the Reds

And yet, the Reds took the series against the Yankees this year 2 out of 3, in NY.


And yet, the Twins took 2 of 3 from the Reds at the bandbox. So I guess the 43 win, 527 RA Twins are the best team in MLB, huh?
 
2012-07-30 08:34:22 PM

scandalrag: I'm basically a Yankee hater, but the Reds are 26-10 against teams 10 or more games under 500. The Yankees are 18-8 against losing teams. The Reds have as many wins against the truly awful teams in the league as the Yankes have games against teams under .500. The Reds are 26-24 against teams .500 or over. The Yankees are 42-33 against teams .500 or over. The Reds swept three straight series against the 45-56 ice cold (1-9) brewers, the AA Corpus Christi Hooks and the 37-63 Rockies. I think fourth is a generous ranking for the Reds.


Where did you get the data broken down like that?

Eyeballing data from baseball-reference.com, the teams with the best record against over .500 teams are:

Washington 30-21 .588

Yankees 42-33 .560
Texas 36-28 .563
Oakland 37-30 .552
Detroit 35-29 .531
Dodgers 26-23 .530
Cincinnati 26-25 .509
 
2012-07-30 08:55:07 PM

scandalrag: And yet, the Twins took 2 of 3 from the Reds at the bandbox. So I guess the 43 win, 527 RA Twins are the best team in MLB, huh?


We were comparing the Reds and Yankees. Try to stay relevant, obviously the Twins are not as good as either team and your point is infantile.
 
2012-07-30 08:57:30 PM

Wellon Dowd: scandalrag: I'm basically a Yankee hater, but the Reds are 26-10 against teams 10 or more games under 500. The Yankees are 18-8 against losing teams. The Reds have as many wins against the truly awful teams in the league as the Yankes have games against teams under .500. The Reds are 26-24 against teams .500 or over. The Yankees are 42-33 against teams .500 or over. The Reds swept three straight series against the 45-56 ice cold (1-9) brewers, the AA Corpus Christi Hooks and the 37-63 Rockies. I think fourth is a generous ranking for the Reds.

Where did you get the data broken down like that?

Eyeballing data from baseball-reference.com, the teams with the best record against over .500 teams are:

Washington 30-21 .588

Yankees 42-33 .560
Texas 36-28 .563
Oakland 37-30 .552
Detroit 35-29 .531
Dodgers 26-23 .530
Cincinnati 26-25 .509


I just went to Baseball-Reference on the situational data like you did and set the winning percentage to = .500. Then I made a typo transferring it over that made Cincinnati look better.

\How have the Padres played 42 games against teams 10 or more games under .500 when they can't play themselves?
 
2012-07-30 08:59:59 PM
I set it to less than or equal to Seattle's .452 (47-57) and then greater than or equal to .500.

\HTML fail
 
2012-07-30 09:06:54 PM

Chakro: scandalrag: And yet, the Twins took 2 of 3 from the Reds at the bandbox. So I guess the 43 win, 527 RA Twins are the best team in MLB, huh?

We were comparing the Reds and Yankees. Try to stay relevant, obviously the Twins are not as good as either team and your point is infantile.


The Red's 3 game series record against the Twins is just as relevant as their 3 games series record against the Yankees. It counts the same in the standings and everything. And since we are name calling, learn the meaning of relevance, tard.

\Small sample sizes are small is still the only relevant point about 3 games out of 101.
 
2012-07-30 09:16:10 PM
About that best record in baseball....the Padres are currently beating up on the Reds pretty badly.

Leake has pitched very well at times this season, but I still only trust him about half as much as any other starter. When he loses it, he loses it bad. So unless the Reds can come back big time here, this winning streak is coming to an end.

Of course it's baseball, so statistically this was pretty much overdue, and in the long run nothing to worry about (I hope, get back to me after the Pirates series this weekend).
 
2012-07-30 09:17:28 PM

scandalrag: I just went to Baseball-Reference on the situational data like you did and set the winning percentage to = .500. Then I made a typo transferring it over that made Cincinnati look better.

\How have the Padres played 42 games against teams 10 or more games under .500 when they can't play themselves?


I forgot about the situational statistics page. I was looking at the 2012 NL and AL season pages.
 
2012-07-30 09:19:25 PM

scandalrag: Chakro: scandalrag: And yet, the Twins took 2 of 3 from the Reds at the bandbox. So I guess the 43 win, 527 RA Twins are the best team in MLB, huh?

We were comparing the Reds and Yankees. Try to stay relevant, obviously the Twins are not as good as either team and your point is infantile.

The Red's 3 game series record against the Twins is just as relevant as their 3 games series record against the Yankees. It counts the same in the standings and everything. And since we are name calling, learn the meaning of relevance, tard.

\Small sample sizes are small is still the only relevant point about 3 games out of 101.


Head to head comparison about the two teams in question is pertinent even if the sample is small. I didn't call you a name, I said your point was infantile, meaning childish and not appropriate. As for calling me a tard about the meaning of relevant, a quick search shows synonyms as : applicable, germane, apposite, appropriate, suitable, fitting, which your comment was not. I'm done with you, you are not worth my time.
 
2012-07-30 10:13:38 PM

Chakro: scandalrag: Chakro: scandalrag: And yet, the Twins took 2 of 3 from the Reds at the bandbox. So I guess the 43 win, 527 RA Twins are the best team in MLB, huh?

We were comparing the Reds and Yankees. Try to stay relevant, obviously the Twins are not as good as either team and your point is infantile.

The Red's 3 game series record against the Twins is just as relevant as their 3 games series record against the Yankees. It counts the same in the standings and everything. And since we are name calling, learn the meaning of relevance, tard.

\Small sample sizes are small is still the only relevant point about 3 games out of 101.

Head to head comparison about the two teams in question is pertinent even if the sample is small. I didn't call you a name, I said your point was infantile, meaning childish and not appropriate. As for calling me a tard about the meaning of relevant, a quick search shows synonyms as : applicable, germane, apposite, appropriate, suitable, fitting, which your comment was not. I'm done with you, you are not worth my time.


You did not say pertinent, you said relevant. Relevance implies a statistically significant relationship. There is literally no significant correlation between the results of 3 games and the relative strengths of the two teams involved. If one team should win 55% of the games (essentially a 9-10 win differential between the teams), they still lose the series 42.5% of the time. The better team gets swept over 9% of the time. Even over an 82 game hockey season, the best team finishes with the best record only 32% of the time. So again, how is the 3 games the Reds played against the Yankees any more relevant than the 3 games against the Twins?
 
2012-07-31 09:13:49 AM

FriarReb98: stpickrell: What is this with the Pirates and Orioles both having winning seasons and in August?

This year they're going to party like it's 1979?


Well, the Orioles beat the Angels and the Pirates beat the Reds ...
 
2012-07-31 01:52:02 PM

Junco Partner: Go Natinals!

[www.examiner.com image 351x512]

/actually a Nats fan


Strasbrug's!

www.washingtonpost.com
 
2012-07-31 02:06:17 PM
This team could be the hottest team in baseball right now. Not the Reds, who have won 10 straight, but against such stiff competition as the Houston Astros and Colorado Rockies. Not the Nats, who are 8-2 in their last ten. Nope, this team is in the AL West and powered by electric young stars. Not the Angels.

The Oakland Athletics. Now second place in the AL West, 3.5 games behind Texas.
 
Displayed 68 of 68 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report