Fragile (or not)
Happy 65th Birthday Lou Piniella!
I put together some historical perspecitve on how solid or fragile things can be now that the 2008 Cubs are 83-50 (+33) and have the best record in baseball.
The 1984 Cubs finished in first place at 96-65 (+31) and their high water mark was 90-58 (+32) on Sept. 15th.
Go, Dernier, Sandberg and Sutcliffe, Go.
They lost in the NLCS to San Diego, 3-2.
----------------------------
The 1969 Cubs won their 5th in a row and were 84-52 (+32) on Sept 2nd. They had just beaten the Cincy Reds after an 8-2 win, still holding a 5 game lead over the Mets.
This was the high water mark for the season.
Go Williams, Santo and Banks, Go.
They proceeded to lose 8 in a row and 11-12.
They became one of the most remembered teams not to go to postseason competition.
-----------------------------
The last time the Cubs had a team that was above +33 games over .500 was 1945.
The 1945 Cubs were 83-50 on Sept 9th. They finished in 1st place at 98-56 (+42).
Go Phil Cavaretta and Hank Borowy, Go.
They lost to the Tigers in the WS, 4-3. The franchise' last appearance in the WS.
-----------------------------
The 1935 Cubs finished at 100-54 (+46), they were 83-52 on Sept 7th.
They had a 21 game winning streak in September including winning 21 of their last 23 games.
Go Gabby Hartnet and Charlie Root, Go.
They lost in the WS to the Tigers 4-2.
-----------------------------
The high water mark for the 1932 Cubs was 89-60 (+29) on Sept. 20.
Go Lon Warneke and Kiki Cuyler, Go.
They lost in the WS to the Yankees 4-0.
-----------------------------
The 1918 Cubs were 84-44 (+40) before losing the last game of that season.
Go Hippo Vaughn, Go.
They lost to Babe Ruth's Redsox in the World Series, 4-2.
-----------------------------
The 1910 Cubs were 104-50 (+54) at season end to win the NL pennant.
Go King Cole, Go.
They lost to the Philadelphia A's in the WS, 4-1.
---------------------------
The 1908 Cubs were 99-55 (+44) for the season...including the Merkel tie game.
They were 83-51 on Sept. 13th.
Go Tinker to Evers to Chance, Go.
They beat the Tigers in the World Series, 4-1.
Paradise Lost?
------------------------------
The 1907 Cubs were 106-42 (+64) on Oct. 4th, at their high water mark with 4 games left in the season.
Go Heinie Zimmerman, Go.
They won the World Series, beating the Tigers 4-0-1.
------------------------------
The 1906 Cubs were 116-36 (+80) at season finish. This is the franchise benchmark and the 116 wins was tied by Lou Piniella's Seattle Mariners in 2001 (116-46) although that team's high mark was "only" +71.
Go Mordecai Brown, Go.
They lost in the WS, 4-2 to the Chicago junior circuit franchise.
Twitter RSS for TCR
#1 Re: Fragile (or not)
#2 Re: Fragile (or not)
thanks, corrected!
#3 Re: Fragile (or not)
CUBSTER: To be fair to the 1984 Cubs, the team had earned home field advantage due to the record. However, because there were no lights at Wrigley, the Padres got the deciding game 5.
It was bullshit, and frankly, the same bullshit that Miserable Dan Uggla has caused the NL this year.
As I do believe somewhat in unique "Cubbie Occurances", I have dread that somehow Dan Uggla's fuckups will this year cost the Cubs home field advantage in the World Series, where the team has been pretty much unbeatable.
#5 Re: Fragile (or not)
While it is true that World Series Games would have been moved to Comiskey if the Cubs had won, I don't believe home field was based on records in 1984.
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstan...
http://www.beepcentral.com/blogs/bindex.aspx?ubid=...
#7 Re: Fragile (or not)
As I recall it alternated. We did have the best record though. Same in '89.
#8 Re: Fragile (or not)
We had home field advantange in 1989. Lost game 1, won game 2 at Wrigley, then lost all 3 in San Francisco.
#10 Re: Fragile (or not)
NEAL, et. al.:
You guys are right, and my memory gets worse each year. HF advantage was alternating, so would not have made that much difference - but it was unfair.
I believe that if you have earned the best record over an entire season in any sport, you deserve the advantage of having the extra potential games in your backyard.
Even in the NCAA March Madness, teams are rewarded based on their records, with regional seeding.
Only a dickhead like Bud Selig would make an exhibition game mean the decisive factor in the all-important post season for his sport.
#21 Re: Fragile (or not)
I don't mind the HF advantage determined by the all-star game. It wasn't determined by best record before anyway. The all-star game is less arbitrary than altnernating, which is what happened previously. If you give it to the team with the best record, then teams with weak schedules (the Angels, the D-Backs?) have an advantage. If you give it to the league with the best interleague record then the Cubs have to suffer because the Nationals suck.
The Cubs sent a shit load of players to the ASG, so they had an opportunity to influence the outcome. Plus, interleague games had made a joke out of the ASG, so I like the fact that they did something.
#4 Re: Fragile (or not)
We did what we were supposed to do in August, which is beat up on the weak (18-6). Now it gets alot tougher, other than 3 at Cincy, it's all .500+ ballclubs.
#6 Re: Fragile (or not)
E-Man: The one important trend I see is that the Cubs have won 13 of their last 14 ROAD games, including Az, Milw and Fla...but even if they friggin' win out...it won't mean a thing when the post-season starts. I do agree though, that Lidge and Uggla should be flogged.
#11 Re: Fragile (or not)
The Road trend truly is a pleasant new development.
Hope they can keep it going!
#9 Re: Fragile (or not)
First NL teams to 83 wins:
2008: CHC (?); Aug. 27
2007: AZ (lost NLCS) and NYM (collapsed and missed playoffs); Sept. 12
2006: NYM (lost NLCS); Sept. 1
2005: STL (lost NLCS); Aug. 28
2004: STL (lost WS); Aug. 25
2003: ATL (lost NLDS); Aug. 23
2002: AZ (lost NLDS); Aug. 25
2001: HOU (lost NLDS); Sept. 7
BaseballRace.com and Baseball-Reference.com
Just looking at the decade, does that mean we only have a 1 in 8 chance of a pennant?
#12 Re: Fragile (or not)
Hmmm...compare our three top starters w/the staffs of the above.
Post Season is about pitching.
If you have the time, it'd be great to see comparisons.
As I have said all year, the only team that gives me pause for thought is the Phillies in the NL.
#13 Re: Fragile (or not)
Should one use Good Zambrano or Evil Zambrano for the purpose of this comparison?
#14 Re: Fragile (or not)
ha! good point. maybe "September Z"
#15 Re: Fragile (or not)
I wonder if Z is like the Talking Krusty Doll from the Treehouse of Horror...
If so, perhaps Fontenot accidentally flipped his switch to evil during a piggyback ride?
#19 Re: Fragile (or not)
I'm proud owner of that doll.
My kids and I love it.
#16 Re: Fragile (or not)
I couldn't agree more, the postseason is about shut-down pitching, specifically the top 3 starters and top 3 bullpen guys on the staff.
By that measure, the Phillies though don't scare me. Beyond Hamels and Lidge, and maybe Durbin, they don't have the muscle I don't think.
The teams that scare me are the Brewers, because that's Sheets and Sabathia 4 times in a 7-game series, and Arizona, because Brandon Webb is money.
Are we built for the playoffs? If our pitching is basically Good Z, Demp, Harden, Marmol, Shark, Wood, I like our chances.......
#17 Re: Fragile (or not)
'08 Cubs are much better equipped for the playoffs than '07 Cubs, imo. Not that '07 Cubs were bad or anything, but they were going to need to hit a hot streak for the playoffs. Instead they hit a cold streak. I think the '08 class will be a little bit more immune to a cold streak.
#18 Re: Fragile (or not)
You know what's a real kick in the balls? Linking to a Sting video at work. I'd rather be RickRolled.
#20 Re: Fragile (or not)
Later in the evening...
I'm an orthopod, not a urologist.
I probably better wear a cup.
Maybe it was a reference to Nuts on Clark?
#34 Re: Fragile (or not)
mark clark disapproves.
#22 Re: Fragile (or not)
I finally saw the highlights from last night's Cards-Brewers game - Villanueva really pissed off Pujols mightely with all of his jawing. That was just plain stupid. Pujols even said after that he "woke up a sleeping giant". They ended up scoring the next inning to win the game.
#23 Re: Fragile (or not)
Well if the Cardinals are sleep walking through games agianst the team they're chasing for the wild card slot, they probably deserve to be laughed at.
Sort of reminds me of the time when Bonds said that Zambrano would learn respect. Barry, he's still waiting for his lesson.
#24 Re: Fragile (or not)
I thought that was Prior? I remember Prior throwing inside on him or possibly hitting him and they're being words. Maybe it was both...
#25 Re: Fragile (or not)
Upon further review the crew chief has determined that yes, in fact, it was Mark Prior.
#26 Re: Fragile (or not)
Crew chief may have gotten this one wrong. I remember Prior not backing down to Barry, but I'm pretty sure the respect line was because of a Z fist pump:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20...
#27 Re: Fragile (or not)
It seems that the MLB umpires are not the only ones who need replay.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2...
#29 Re: Fragile (or not)
Yeah, I think Rob G. & myself are remembering one incident and you guys are remembering something else. My bad.
#31 Re: Fragile (or not)
Well, this was Villaneuva walking off the mound after striking out a batter with the bases loaded. So the Cardinals weren't sleep walking, they were in the midst of a rally that came up short. Afterwards, Villaneuva looked right at the Cardinals dugout, threw both hands up in the air, held them up there, said something, punded his chest with both hands, said something else, etc. All while looking at, talking to, and walking towards by the Cardinals on his way off the field. Pujols walked from the on-deck circle towards him and kept telling him to shut the fuck up (easy to read his lips on sportscenter) and the home plate ump had to get between them and had to yell and Villaneuva to get his ass in the dugout.
Return to Homepage