Chasing Records

[Balta1701]

3 against the Athletics at home

Road trip for 3 to Anaheim

Road trip for 3 in San Diego

3 in Anaheim back in Chicago

3 in Detroit to finish the season.

 

Athletics are out of the playoffs but have been really good since August 1. San Diego is 2 games up for the last Wild Card spot in the NL so they will be playing hard, and have Tatis back now.

Tigers are currently 3 back in the Wild Card. Possible that the last couple games might not matter, but they have to think that if they stay 2 back they have a shot to finish the season with a sweep and sneak in.

Angels are 19-30 in the second half which is only good in comparison to literally 1 other team. 

5-10 would be so much better than this team has played recently, but with the Angels on there they might be able to steal 2 wins in a series on the road and make this close?

[Paulie4Pres]

2 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

3 against the Athletics at home

Road trip for 3 to Anaheim

Road trip for 3 in San Diego

3 in Anaheim back in Chicago

3 in Detroit to finish the season.

 

Athletics are out of the playoffs but have been really good since August 1. San Diego is 2 games up for the last Wild Card spot in the NL so they will be playing hard, and have Tatis back now.

Tigers are currently 3 back in the Wild Card. Possible that the last couple games might not matter, but they have to think that if they stay 2 back they have a shot to finish the season with a sweep and sneak in.

Angels are 19-30 in the second half which is only good in comparison to literally 1 other team. 

5-10 would be so much better than this team has played recently, but with the Angels on there they might be able to steal 2 wins in a series on the road and make this close?

Better chance of this team losing every game for the rest of the season.

[Balta1701]

39 minutes ago, Paulie4Pres said:

Better chance of this team losing every game for the rest of the season.

If you replaced the Angels with the Twins and Royals I’d buy that, but the Angels are just bad. Normal baseball bad not White Sox bad, but they’re not sweeping 6 games.

[T R U]

30 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

If you replaced the Angels with the Twins and Royals I’d buy that, but the Angels are just bad. Normal baseball bad not White Sox bad, but they’re not sweeping 6 games.

The Angels are 27 games better than the Sox and have almost won just as many games in their past 10 than the White Sox have won since what, July? This is a AAA team, if they lost every game to close the season I wouldn’t be surprised even though that’s unlikely. 

[Paulie4Pres]

47 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

If you replaced the Angels with the Twins and Royals I’d buy that, but the Angels are just bad. Normal baseball bad not White Sox bad, but they’re not sweeping 6 games.

This is not a major league baseball team, so their chances of beating ANYONE are slim to none. The Angels are still an MLB team.

Not to mention, the players are completely 100% checked out.

Edited September 12 by Paulie4Pres

[DoUEvenShift]

 

[Kyyle23]

I just went through the first five pages of this thread, and give 99 percent of us a little credit for seeing the iceberg in the ocean that we were cruising toward at 100 mph

[Bob Sacamano]

23 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

I just went through the first five pages of this thread, and give 99 percent of us a little credit for seeing the iceberg in the ocean that we were cruising toward at 100 mph

This season hasn't been shocking at all lol

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Kyyle23 said:

I just went through the first five pages of this thread, and give 99 percent of us a little credit for seeing the iceberg in the ocean that we were cruising toward at 100 mph

And a couple of those Excuse O Matics look like fools.

[Tnetennba]

1 hour ago, Kyyle23 said:

I just went through the first five pages of this thread, and give 99 percent of us a little credit for seeing the iceberg in the ocean that we were cruising toward at 100 mph

No one quite envisioned the gaping hole in the hull after the collision, but we at least saw the fucking iceberg! Pity those in charge couldn't see the obvious.

[WhiteSox2023]

18 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

And a couple of those Excuse O Matics look like fools.

I think I can guess who, but I may go back for fun anyways.  🤣

[Milkman delivers]

Thanks for reminding me of my incorrect predictions, @Bob Sacamano!

[Paulie4Pres]

2 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

I just went through the first five pages of this thread, and give 99 percent of us a little credit for seeing the iceberg in the ocean that we were cruising toward at 100 mph

Most of us saw the iceberg. We just didn't think the ship would sink in 34 seconds.

[JoeC]

2 hours ago, baseball_gal_aly said:

Delete, wrong thread

In this thread? No such thing.

[Bob Sacamano]

1 hour ago, Milkman delivers said:

Thanks for reminding me of my incorrect predictions, @Bob Sacamano!

I laughed at and liked a lot of comments haha

[JoeC]

On 4/22/2024 at 10:36 PM, T R U said:

Kopech is getting traded by the deadline and it feels like a certainty he’s a lights out reliever or a competent starter for whoever gets him. 

Well who could have seen this coming?

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Paulie4Pres said:

Most of us saw the iceberg. We just didn't think the ship would sink in 34 seconds.

Or the nuclear explosion after it hit the iceberg repeatedly. 

[caulfield12]

29 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Or the nuclear explosion after it hit the iceberg repeatedly. 

Or the Fukushima cleanup/containment ongoing nearly a decade later.

Chernobyl still the closer parallel though.  Soviet bureaucrats replaced by the usual front office favorites.

[Quin]

3 hours ago, JoeC said:

In this thread? No such thing.

Nah, I fulfilled the properly submitted request.

[Texsox]

He was gone before he really had a chance but Pedro was on pace to break Connie Mack's all time managerial loss record.

That's right, the winningest manager also had the most losses. 

[T R U]

1 hour ago, Texsox said:

He was gone before he really had a chance but Pedro was on pace to break Connie Mack's all time managerial loss record.

That's right, the winningest manager also had the most losses. 

That makes a ton of sense though in a sport where if you lose between 60-70 games a year you are probably managing for a very long time while losing 90+ games a year gets you fired fairly quickly.

[Texsox]

20 minutes ago, T R U said:

That makes a ton of sense though in a sport where if you lose between 60-70 games a year you are probably managing for a very long time while losing 90+ games a year gets you fired fairly quickly.

I was surprised to learn he actually had a losing record. 3731 - 3948

By modern standards he probably would have been fired in 1908, definitely in 1915. 

[JoeC]

3 minutes ago, Texsox said:

I was surprised to learn he actually had a losing record. 3731 - 3948

Also helps when you own the team; makes it a little hard to get fired.

[caulfield12]

26 minutes ago, Texsox said:

I was surprised to learn he actually had a losing record. 3731 - 3948

By modern standards he probably would have been fired in 1908, definitely in 1915. 

https://www.baseball-almanac.com/managers/manager_losses_top_100.shtml

Look at all the Hall of Famers on that list.

Bochy Mauch Baker Piniella Showalter Francona....at least 4 if not 5 more that aren't in yet.

Edited Friday at 12:44 PM by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

13 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Or the Fukushima cleanup/containment ongoing nearly a decade later.

Chernobyl still the closer parallel though.  Soviet bureaucrats replaced by the usual front office favorites.

Sure.  Because we needed a fact check on that.