GatewayRedbirds.com

The Cubs have the dumbest ass logo is sports. So stupid.

c'mon now.

[SHOW]

those are just 3 off the top of my head, without even getting into some of the ridiculous university logos out there.

BW23 wrote:

Magneto2.0 wrote:Anyone still think they're gonna win 110 games?

No. I'll even say that they won't win 100 games.

You think they'll go from their current .712 clip through a third of the season...to less than a .573 clip for the last two thirds? That clip is going to come down. 5 teams last year did better than .573. Basically, it's hard to see them falling off the cliff that much. They'll probably come down to about the .590 - .600 level the rest of the way and take 101-103 games. Unless they start losing starters left and right to injury.

TruffleShuffle wrote:c'mon now.

[SHOW]

those are just 3 off the top of my head, without even getting into some of the ridiculous university logos out there.

The Wizards have replaced that one with a version that looks like the Washington Monument is poking a butthole.

kesselrunning wrote:You think they'll go from their current .712 clip through a third of the season...to less than a .573 clip for the last two thirds? That clip is going to come down. 5 teams last year did better than .573. Basically, it's hard to see them falling off the cliff that much. They'll probably come down to about the .590 - .600 level the rest of the way and take 101-103 games. Unless they start losing starters left and right to injury.

I think that's a very reasonable point. However, .573 is still a 93-win pace over 162 games. That's still one of the better teams in MLB in any given season, and I don't think it's all that crazy to think that the Cubs could do that from here on out. Mind you, I don't think it's the most likely event- I think your range is most likely.

That said... a .573 clip from now until the end of the season is 63 wins. If it's .600, that's 66 wins. Any team can win or lose 3 more games over 110 due to random variation, good/bad base runs luck, strand rates, etc...

One of this biggest barriers to huge 110+ win totals is that they are unnecessary. Once a team has run away with the division and locked down home field, strategies change. Guys get extra days off. Starters get skipped. Teams lose their edge. Most managers are more focused on putting the team in the best position to compete in the playoffs than setting the franchise record for wins. I thought the Cards were a lock for 105+ wins this team last year, but between injuries, guys fading down the stretch, and extra days off, that didn't happen.

For some perspective. Through 52 games:

2015 Cardinals 34-18 (Also the record of the 2005 Cardinals through 52 games)
2016 Cubs 37-15

The Cubs are good, but, record-wise, they are only slightly better than last year's 100-win division winner at this point.

I don't see this team having any kind of long-term skid which would prevent a 100+ win season. There just aren't many holes. But they could clinch early if Cards or Pirates don't go on a tear. Unless Washington or SF challenge them for best record, they might turn their focus on getting ready for the playoffs - which sometimes backfires as teams can't get their mojo back in October.

dan_yall wrote:One of this biggest barriers to huge 110+ win totals is that they are unnecessary. Once a team has run away with the division and locked down home field, strategies change. Guys get extra days off. Starters get skipped. Teams lose their edge. Most managers are more focused on putting the team in the best position to compete in the playoffs than setting the franchise record for wins. I thought the Cards were a lock for 105+ wins this team last year, but between injuries, guys fading down the stretch, and extra days off, that didn't happen.

For some perspective. Through 52 games:

2015 Cardinals 34-18 (Also the record of the 2005 Cardinals through 52 games)
2016 Cubs 37-15

The Cubs are good, but, record-wise, they are only slightly better than last year's 100-win division winner at this point.

Through 52 games:
2015 Cards RD +60 ExpWL: 33-19
2016 Cubs RD +134 ExpWL: 41-11


I mean, there's more stats that we can get into, but there's more reasons than just the record that people are high on the Cubs maintaining a high level of play throughout the season.

Banedon wrote:

dan_yall wrote:One of this biggest barriers to huge 110+ win totals is that they are unnecessary. Once a team has run away with the division and locked down home field, strategies change. Guys get extra days off. Starters get skipped. Teams lose their edge. Most managers are more focused on putting the team in the best position to compete in the playoffs than setting the franchise record for wins. I thought the Cards were a lock for 105+ wins this team last year, but between injuries, guys fading down the stretch, and extra days off, that didn't happen.

For some perspective. Through 52 games:

2015 Cardinals 34-18 (Also the record of the 2005 Cardinals through 52 games)
2016 Cubs 37-15

The Cubs are good, but, record-wise, they are only slightly better than last year's 100-win division winner at this point.

Through 52 games:
2015 Cards RD +60 ExpWL: 33-19
2016 Cubs RD +134 ExpWL: 41-11


I mean, there's more stats that we can get into, but there's more reasons than just the record that people are high on the Cubs maintaining a high level of play throughout the season.

Sorry, man. I never should have favorably compared the 2016 Cubs to two 100 win teams. That clearly doesn't fully capture their greatness. Going forward, I'll make sure that the only teams mentioned in the same breath as the 2016 Cubs are the '27 Yankees and the 2001 Mariners.

I think the rest of my point stands. Great teams rarely have the incentive to chase huge win totals and often employ strategies that sacrifice additional superficial wins at the end of the season in favor of playoff readiness.

Through a third of the season, the Cubs are on pace for 117 wins.

dmarx114 wrote:Through a third of the season, the Cubs are on pace for 117 wins.

Let's see what they do in the tournament.