Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=93981:date=Apr 30 2010, 03:52 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Apr 30 2010, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93977:date=Apr 30 2010, 05:05 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2010, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93974:date=Apr 30 2010, 05:01 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Apr 30 2010, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The Cubs and Cards had the same Interleague schedule last season, <b>but the Sox & Royals series.</b> The schedules are balanced as they can be, and they can't be truly fair across the board unless we home & home with the whole NL. I think the schedule makers do a great job having so few differences over the course of 162 games. I'm with PcB on this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that's why it's absolute horseshit -- right there.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not really. There are 162 games in a season, the Cubs and Cards have the exact same schedule for over 90% of those games. In any professional or collegiate sport, the MLB has the most balanced schedules for same division teams by a long shot.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly.
Arguing against interleague play in general is one thing. But about specifically playing the Sox is fucking dumb.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 11,807
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Amazing.
I've concluded that there is a portion of this site that will take the other side of any Sox discussion just to get me wound up. That's the only thing that makes sense at this point.
Posts: 8,024
Threads: 100
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=93991:date=Apr 30 2010, 08:24 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2010, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Amazing.
I've concluded that there is a portion of this site that will take the other side of any Sox discussion just to get me wound up. That's the only thing that makes sense at this point.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You understand that I agree with you with regard to how it should be...but for completely different reasons, right?
Posts: 959
Threads: 6
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=93987:date=Apr 30 2010, 08:05 PM:name=Destined)-->QUOTE (Destined @ Apr 30 2010, 08:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93981:date=Apr 30 2010, 03:52 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Apr 30 2010, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93977:date=Apr 30 2010, 05:05 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2010, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93974:date=Apr 30 2010, 05:01 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Apr 30 2010, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The Cubs and Cards had the same Interleague schedule last season, <b>but the Sox & Royals series.</b> The schedules are balanced as they can be, and they can't be truly fair across the board unless we home & home with the whole NL. I think the schedule makers do a great job having so few differences over the course of 162 games. I'm with PcB on this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that's why it's absolute horseshit -- right there.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not really. There are 162 games in a season, the Cubs and Cards have the exact same schedule for over 90% of those games. In any professional or collegiate sport, the MLB has the most balanced schedules for same division teams by a long shot.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly.
Arguing against interleague play in general is one thing. But about specifically playing the Sox is fucking dumb.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Playing the same schedule against the same set of teams, regardless of league, is fair. Having to play 6 games against a more competitive team while your direct competition plays 6 games against an inferior team is not.
FOR THE LOVE OF FUCK WHY CAN'T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THIS.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=93991:date=Apr 30 2010, 08:24 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2010, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Amazing.
I've concluded that there is a portion of this site that will take the other side of any Sox discussion just to get me wound up. That's the only thing that makes sense at this point.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dude, it's the most perplexing thing in the world. It started with Swisher. That was amazing to me. You were vilified for hating a White Sox player. Vilified. Am I spelling that right? Even if you were completely irrational in your hate (and you aren't) why would it bother anyone here? Why do you care? It's the fucking White Sox. You can hate them for pro-creating if you want and that would be perfectly acceptable. Hating the White Sox is like hating AIDS, and racism, and Albert Pujol's stupid face, and poverty. It's all the same. So what the fuck?
Butcher, everything you've said in this thread is Bible.
Wang.
Posts: 2,323
Threads: 20
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=93995:date=Apr 30 2010, 06:36 PM:name=Bricklayer)-->QUOTE (Bricklayer @ Apr 30 2010, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93987:date=Apr 30 2010, 08:05 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Apr 30 2010, 08:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93981:date=Apr 30 2010, 03:52 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Apr 30 2010, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93977:date=Apr 30 2010, 05:05 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2010, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93974:date=Apr 30 2010, 05:01 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Apr 30 2010, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The Cubs and Cards had the same Interleague schedule last season, <b>but the Sox & Royals series.</b> The schedules are balanced as they can be, and they can't be truly fair across the board unless we home & home with the whole NL. I think the schedule makers do a great job having so few differences over the course of 162 games. I'm with PcB on this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that's why it's absolute horseshit -- right there.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not really. There are 162 games in a season, the Cubs and Cards have the exact same schedule for over 90% of those games. In any professional or collegiate sport, the MLB has the most balanced schedules for same division teams by a long shot.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly.
Arguing against interleague play in general is one thing. But about specifically playing the Sox is fucking dumb.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Playing the same schedule against the same set of teams, regardless of league, is fair. Having to play 6 games against a more competitive team while your direct competition plays 6 games against an inferior team is not.
FOR THE LOVE OF FUCK WHY CAN'T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THIS.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dude, I think people understand that it's usually better to play 6 against the Royals than the White Sox. I know I've said that since the beginning. What's being debated is how much better it is. Again, here's why it <i>might</i> not make much of a difference:
1. In any given year, though it seems hard to believe lately, the Royals could have a better record than the Sox, in which case playing the Sox is better.
2. The schedules are not the same sans the Royals/Sox. Last year the Cubs and Cards had another non-similar AL opponent, and the Cards' opponent (Twins) was 22 wins better than the Cubs' (Indians). Since those were 3 game series not 6 it doesn't fully erase the Royals/Sox difference, but it cuts it by half or more, since the Twins were the best AL team either the Cards or Cubs faced.
3. The NL portion of the schedule isn't fully balanced either. If the Cubs last year played an extra game or even series, which I think has happened before, with say the Padres, and the Cards got the Phillies, that is also unbalanced. You'd have to look at the schedules as a whole to know who had the overall rougher schedule.
4. While you can look at the Cards record against the Royals and the Cubs record against the Sox and realize that the Cubs have the harder time in that comparison, you also though have to factor in the fact that the Cards are generally better than the Cubs, so they would likely have a higher win % v. any team. Meaning that if the Cards are beating the Royals at .545 clip (random number for the example) that doesn't mean the Cubs would. They could have a .500 record against the Royals. There's no way to know, but I'm guessing that since interleague started the Cubs record is worse than the Cards across the board. One thing that would be good to know is what is the total KC win/loss record since interleauge compared to the Sox. Another thing to ask is how do the Cubs do v. the Sox compared to how they play overall. The Cubs could have .475 record overall since interleauge began, but a .500 v. the Sox. In which case playing the Sox could be good for the Cubs. Maybe they get up for those games, play better in them, etc.
Anyway, I hate that they get the Royals and we get the Sox for that many games. I despise it. But how much of a difference that makes isn't the same each year, and the difference might not actually correlate to a very significant disparage in overall record.
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=93995:date=Apr 30 2010, 06:36 PM:name=Bricklayer)-->QUOTE (Bricklayer @ Apr 30 2010, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Playing the same schedule against the same set of teams, regardless of league, is fair. Having to play 6 games against a more competitive team while your direct competition plays 6 games against an inferior team is not.
FOR THE LOVE OF FUCK WHY CAN'T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THIS.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I get that. Yo comprende. Change the series to 3 games like Sheps said. But this issue stems from INTERLEAGUE play in general and gives you guys an argument about INTERLEAGUE play and the way they schedule INTERLEAGUE play. That is not a direct reason not to play the Sox.
And the gap between the two isn't night and day anyways. They're in the same league. It's not like the Cardinals are playing the Mizzouri Tigers.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
We played the Twins last year. That's when Milton threw away the 2nd out.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 2,323
Threads: 20
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=94003:date=Apr 30 2010, 08:17 PM:name=Destined)-->QUOTE (Destined @ Apr 30 2010, 08:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->We played the Twins last year. That's when Milton threw away the 2nd out.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ah, I'm probably mixed up. I thought we played the Tigers, Sox and Indians, Cards got Twins, KC and Tigers. But I honestly don't remember.
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=94001:date=Apr 30 2010, 08:08 PM:name=MrSheps)-->QUOTE (MrSheps @ Apr 30 2010, 08:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93995:date=Apr 30 2010, 06:36 PM:name=Bricklayer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bricklayer @ Apr 30 2010, 06:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93987:date=Apr 30 2010, 08:05 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Apr 30 2010, 08:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93981:date=Apr 30 2010, 03:52 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Apr 30 2010, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93977:date=Apr 30 2010, 05:05 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2010, 05:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=93974:date=Apr 30 2010, 05:01 PM:name=Destined)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Destined @ Apr 30 2010, 05:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The Cubs and Cards had the same Interleague schedule last season, <b>but the Sox & Royals series.</b> The schedules are balanced as they can be, and they can't be truly fair across the board unless we home & home with the whole NL. I think the schedule makers do a great job having so few differences over the course of 162 games. I'm with PcB on this.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And that's why it's absolute horseshit -- right there.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not really. There are 162 games in a season, the Cubs and Cards have the exact same schedule for over 90% of those games. In any professional or collegiate sport, the MLB has the most balanced schedules for same division teams by a long shot.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly.
Arguing against interleague play in general is one thing. But about specifically playing the Sox is fucking dumb.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Playing the same schedule against the same set of teams, regardless of league, is fair. Having to play 6 games against a more competitive team while your direct competition plays 6 games against an inferior team is not.
FOR THE LOVE OF FUCK WHY CAN'T PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THIS.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dude, I think people understand that it's usually better to play 6 against the Royals than the White Sox. I know I've said that since the beginning. What's being debated is how much better it is. Again, here's why it <i>might</i> not make much of a difference:
<b>
1. In any given year, though it seems hard to believe lately, the Royals could have a better record than the Sox, in which case playing the Sox is better. </b>
2. The schedules are not the same sans the Royals/Sox. Last year the Cubs and Cards had another non-similar AL opponent, and the Cards' opponent (Twins) was 22 wins better than the Cubs' (Indians). Since those were 3 game series not 6 it doesn't fully erase the Royals/Sox difference, but it cuts it by half or more, since the Twins were the best AL team either the Cards or Cubs faced.
3. The NL portion of the schedule isn't fully balanced either. If the Cubs last year played an extra game or even series, which I think has happened before, with say the Padres, and the Cards got the Phillies, that is also unbalanced. You'd have to look at the schedules as a whole to know who had the overall rougher schedule.
<b>
4. While you can look at the Cards record against the Royals and the Cubs record against the Sox and realize that the Cubs have the harder time in that comparison, you also though have to factor in the fact that the Cards are generally better than the Cubs, so they would likely have a higher win % v. any team. Meaning that if the Cards are beating the Royals at .545 clip (random number for the example) that doesn't mean the Cubs would. They could have a .500 record against the Royals. There's no way to know, but I'm guessing that since interleague started the Cubs record is worse than the Cards across the board. One thing that would be good to know is what is the total KC win/loss record since interleauge compared to the Sox. Another thing to ask is how do the Cubs do v. the Sox compared to how they play overall. The Cubs could have .475 record overall since interleauge began, but a .500 v. the Sox. In which case playing the Sox could be good for the Cubs. Maybe they get up for those games, play better in them, etc. </b>
Anyway, I hate that they get the Royals and we get the Sox for that many games. I despise it. But how much of a difference that makes isn't the same each year, and the difference might not actually correlate to a very significant disparage in overall record.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes sir. I agree.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 11,807
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->In any given year, though it seems hard to believe lately, the Royals could have a better record than the Sox, in which case playing the Sox is better.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just curious -- when was the last time that happened? And do you see it changing anytime soon? With the disparity in financial resources, I don't. Although...anything is possible, I suppose.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->The schedules are not the same sans the Royals/Sox. Last year the Cubs and Cards had another non-similar AL opponent, and the Cards' opponent (Twins) was 22 wins better than the Cubs' (Indians). Since those were 3 game series not 6 it doesn't fully erase the Royals/Sox difference, but it cuts it by half or more, since the Twins were the best AL team either the Cards or Cubs faced.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But, see -- that is random and I don't have as big of a problem with it. You draw the short straw and get the Twins during a year when they're world beaters. Shit happens. The Sox/Royals disparity is built in every single season.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->While you can look at the Cards record against the Royals and the Cubs record against the Sox and realize that the Cubs have the harder time in that comparison, you also though have to factor in the fact that the Cards are generally better than the Cubs, so they would likely have a higher win % v. any team. Meaning that if the Cards are beating the Royals at .545 clip (random number for the example) that doesn't mean the Cubs would. They could have a .500 record against the Royals. There's no way to know, but I'm guessing that since interleague started the Cubs record is worse than the Cards across the board. One thing that would be good to know is what is the total KC win/loss record since interleauge compared to the Sox. Another thing to ask is how do the Cubs do v. the Sox compared to how they play overall. The Cubs could have .475 record overall since interleauge began, but a .500 v. the Sox. In which case playing the Sox could be good for the Cubs. Maybe they get up for those games, play better in them, etc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You don't have to look at the Cubs vs. Sox and Cards vs Royals records or make conjectures about if the Cubs "get up" for the series.<b> Just look at the Royals record every year since interleague started. Now look at the Sox record. Which team is better? Which team would you rather play 6 times a year? </b>You're making this far more complicated than it needs to be.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Anyway, I hate that they get the Royals and we get the Sox for that many games. I despise it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I wish you would have just said that up front. We could have saved about 5 pages of posts. How much it helps the Cards and how much it hurts us doesn't matter. If it gives them just a 1-game edge every season, it's still bullshit.
Fucking hell.
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
![[Image: cubscards2009.png]](http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/6605/cubscards2009.png)
Considering all of the issues that are built into scheduling, I think it's incredible just how close those schedules are. Besides, if the we play the Sox, and the Cards play the Royals, no one has mentioned that the Brewers get the Twins and the Astros get the Rangers, while the Reds get the Indians. In any year, those matchups could play out difference based on how good teams are in both leagues. It is nearly impossible that all six schedules in the division could be exact with Interleague play being in effect. Let's not just focus on the Cardinals, there's four other teams in the division.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I have a hard time believing that Dodger fans get angry about the Giants playing the A's.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 3,801
Threads: 68
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=94011:date=Apr 30 2010, 09:33 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2010, 09:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If it gives them just a 1-game edge every season, it's still bullshit.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They still have to win that game.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.
Posts: 8,024
Threads: 100
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=94011:date=Apr 30 2010, 11:33 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Apr 30 2010, 11:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->In any given year, though it seems hard to believe lately, the Royals could have a better record than the Sox, in which case playing the Sox is better.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just curious -- when was the last time that happened? And do you see it changing anytime soon? With the disparity in financial resources, I don't. Although...anything is possible, I suppose.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->The schedules are not the same sans the Royals/Sox. Last year the Cubs and Cards had another non-similar AL opponent, and the Cards' opponent (Twins) was 22 wins better than the Cubs' (Indians). Since those were 3 game series not 6 it doesn't fully erase the Royals/Sox difference, but it cuts it by half or more, since the Twins were the best AL team either the Cards or Cubs faced.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But, see -- that is random and I don't have as big of a problem with it. You draw the short straw and get the Twins during a year when they're world beaters. Shit happens. The Sox/Royals disparity is built in every single season.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->While you can look at the Cards record against the Royals and the Cubs record against the Sox and realize that the Cubs have the harder time in that comparison, you also though have to factor in the fact that the Cards are generally better than the Cubs, so they would likely have a higher win % v. any team. Meaning that if the Cards are beating the Royals at .545 clip (random number for the example) that doesn't mean the Cubs would. They could have a .500 record against the Royals. There's no way to know, but I'm guessing that since interleague started the Cubs record is worse than the Cards across the board. One thing that would be good to know is what is the total KC win/loss record since interleauge compared to the Sox. Another thing to ask is how do the Cubs do v. the Sox compared to how they play overall. The Cubs could have .475 record overall since interleauge began, but a .500 v. the Sox. In which case playing the Sox could be good for the Cubs. Maybe they get up for those games, play better in them, etc.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You don't have to look at the Cubs vs. Sox and Cards vs Royals records or make conjectures about if the Cubs "get up" for the series.<b> Just look at the Royals record every year since interleague started. Now look at the Sox record. Which team is better? Which team would you rather play 6 times a year? </b>You're making this far more complicated than it needs to be.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Anyway, I hate that they get the Royals and we get the Sox for that many games. I despise it.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I wish you would have just said that up front. We could have saved about 5 pages of posts. How much it helps the Cards and how much it hurts us doesn't matter. If it gives them just a 1-game edge every season, it's still bullshit.
Fucking hell.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1995 was the last season the Royals posted a better record than the Sox.
|
