GatewayRedbirds.com

TruffleShuffle wrote:

Magneto2.0 wrote:

CardRed wrote:They won't maintain this dominance. It's impossible

That's all I'm saying. Do they have 100 win roster? Sure. 110 win/best team ever roster? Not a chance. That's not to say it won't happen, hey the bottom of the NL is really bad, and they have a great team. But they are playing well above what even their wildest projections suggest.

"Not a chance" is literally saying that it won't happen.

He's saying that there's no chance the roster is the most talented ever or a true talent 110 win team. Both of those things are probably true. That doesn't mean they won't or can't do that.

oh, okay. well i still don't see how you can say "sure" to them having a 100 win roster but "not a chance" to a 110 win roster. they have a truckload of young hitters; all it really takes is a couple of them to be better than the projection systems, and you're right around 110 wins, and that doesn't even factor in potential improvements at or before the trade deadline.

davhern wrote:

TruffleShuffle wrote:

Magneto2.0 wrote:

CardRed wrote:They won't maintain this dominance. It's impossible

That's all I'm saying. Do they have 100 win roster? Sure. 110 win/best team ever roster? Not a chance. That's not to say it won't happen, hey the bottom of the NL is really bad, and they have a great team. But they are playing well above what even their wildest projections suggest.

"Not a chance" is literally saying that it won't happen.

He's saying that there's no chance the roster is the most talented ever or a true talent 110 win team. Both of those things are probably true. That doesn't mean they won't or can't do that.

Hahaha not even close to being most talented ever

They are now on pace to win 130 games.

davhern wrote:

TruffleShuffle wrote:

Magneto2.0 wrote:

CardRed wrote:They won't maintain this dominance. It's impossible

That's all I'm saying. Do they have 100 win roster? Sure. 110 win/best team ever roster? Not a chance. That's not to say it won't happen, hey the bottom of the NL is really bad, and they have a great team. But they are playing well above what even their wildest projections suggest.

"Not a chance" is literally saying that it won't happen.

He's saying that there's no chance the roster is the most talented ever or a true talent 110 win team. Both of those things are probably true. That doesn't mean they won't or can't do that.

Exactly.

TruffleShuffle wrote:oh, okay. well i still don't see how you can say "sure" to them having a 100 win roster but "not a chance" to a 110 win roster. they have a truckload of young hitters; all it really takes is a couple of them to be better than the projection systems, and you're right around 110 wins, and that doesn't even factor in potential improvements at or before the trade deadline.

Because nobody makes the leap that a 90 win team has a 100 win roster or a 80 win team has a 90 win roster. Maybe you're a game or two better or worse, hell even 5 wins better or worse depending on a lot of luck. But it's a major major stretch to turn a 100 win roster into a 110 win roster. That's a significant gap.

If the Cubs had a 110 win roster, it would mean they are arguably the best team ever in baseball. That roster isn't even close to that. It's not even the best roster in recent memory.

I think 110 is doable. Sure this doesn't look like that kind of roster but the Cardinals aparently are just going to roll over against them all year and that's a lot of games. The Pirates are the only other team in the division that is tough and the Cubs certainly are better then that. Of course there are certainly other really good teams on the schedule.

Let's put it another way. When you looked at the Cards roster last year did you say "this is a 100 win team?" You are probably lying of you say yes. Yet there they were 100 wins. I think the Cubs can win 110 this year. I plan to pray every night that doesn't happen.

Magneto2.0 wrote:

TruffleShuffle wrote:oh, okay. well i still don't see how you can say "sure" to them having a 100 win roster but "not a chance" to a 110 win roster. they have a truckload of young hitters; all it really takes is a couple of them to be better than the projection systems, and you're right around 110 wins, and that doesn't even factor in potential improvements at or before the trade deadline.

Because nobody makes the leap that a 90 win team has a 100 win roster or a 80 win team has a 90 win roster. Maybe you're a game or two better or worse, hell even 5 wins better or worse depending on a lot of luck. But it's a major major stretch to turn a 100 win roster into a 110 win roster. That's a significant gap.

If the Cubs had a 110 win roster, it would mean they are arguably the best team ever in baseball. That roster isn't even close to that. It's not even the best roster in recent memory.

Well, the Cubs won 97 games last year and are basically replacing Castro (who was terrible last year) with Zobrist, Coghlan with Heyward and various mediocre 5th starters with Lackey. Factor in some improvements by the young hitters and it's quite possible that you're underestimating them as a 100 win team.

Does it matter how many games they win? Even if they go 156-6, it really doesn't matter unless they win the WS. Even if they beat the Mariners season win record, it's irrelevant unless they win the whole thing.

I guess setting the single season win record would only matter to you if you care about baseball at all.