PDA

View Full Version : Cubs 10,000 Wins


JermaineDye05
04-23-2008, 12:37 PM
once they get here, maybe it will help overlook the fact they haven't won in 100 years :D:.

Mr.1Dog
04-23-2008, 12:39 PM
Technically, they have won 10,000 times. They just haven't won anything truly meaningful.:tongue:

white sox bill
04-23-2008, 12:49 PM
How many wins do we have?

DaBears
04-23-2008, 12:54 PM
technically the Cubs have 22 years of existence on us, so I would imagine they have more wins...

Cubs established in 1878
Sox established in 1900

jcw218
04-23-2008, 01:13 PM
Overall records at start of today

Cubs have won 9999 while losing 9465

Sox have won 8383 while losing 8190

overall records found here (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/)

SOXPHILE
04-23-2008, 01:23 PM
This is so stupid. I remember when ESPN was making a big deal last year when the Phillies lost their 10,000th game. They, like the Cubs, have been in existence since the 1870's.

So, as someone mentioned, the Cubs have been around since 1876. That's an average of 77 wins a season. Wow. Congratulations. Just think, in another 130 years, they'll have 20,000 wins !!! Break out the party hats !

turners56
04-23-2008, 01:30 PM
This is so stupid. I remember when ESPN was making a big deal last year when the Phillies lost their 10,000th game. They, like the Cubs, have been in existence since the 1870's.

So, as someone mentioned, the Cubs have been around since 1876. That's an average of 77 wins a season. Wow. Congratulations. Just think, in another 130 years, they'll have 20,000 wins !!! Break out the party hats !

They will definitely win at least one championship by then!

white sox bill
04-23-2008, 01:45 PM
Overall records at start of today

Cubs have won 9999 while losing 9465

Sox have won 8383 while losing 8190

overall records found here (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/)
Yikes the bad guys are ahead of us % wise!

DSpivack
04-23-2008, 01:47 PM
Yikes the bad guys are ahead of us % wise!

They were a very good team that was a contender nearly every season.

Until about 1945, that is. They've pretty much sucked since then. :tongue:

I'm too lazy, but I'm curious if broke it down to, say, since 1945 and before that. I bet they're way under .500 since then, and were way above .500 before then.

PKalltheway
04-23-2008, 01:49 PM
When the Cubs eventually get to 10,000 wins, they will be the second team to reach that milestone, joining the Giants franchise, which got their 10,000th win in 2005. In fact, the Giants' .538 overall winning percentage is the second highest of any team in Major League history, behind the Yankees, of course.

I guess Cub fans have to celebrate something once in a century.

WhiteSox5187
04-23-2008, 02:17 PM
Yikes the bad guys are ahead of us % wise!
That 1919 scandal killed us. Had those guys not been suspended we would have been a first division power house for a while more and probably would not have been a cellar dweller throughout the twenties and the thirties like we were.

jcw218
04-23-2008, 02:32 PM
Yikes the bad guys are ahead of us % wise!

While the Cubs have a better winning % than us, they also have 25 years and 2854 games on us. For the same time frame from 1901 throuogh today the cubs have won 8379 and lost 8231.

jcw218
04-23-2008, 03:08 PM
They were a very good team that was a contender nearly every season.

Until about 1945, that is. They've pretty much sucked since then. :tongue:

I'm too lazy, but I'm curious if broke it down to, say, since 1945 and before that. I bet they're way under .500 since then, and were way above .500 before then.

Here you go broken down into three era's

Pre 1901 won 1620 lost 1234
1901 - 1945 won 3796 lost 3022
post 1945 won 4583 lost 5209

Lip Man 1
04-23-2008, 03:36 PM
Spivack:

Well starting in 1946, the Cubs have had 17 winning seasons.

That's right all of 17 in 62 years.

:rolleyes:

The Sox have had 35 in 62 years.

Does that help?

:D:

Lip

Hitmen77
04-23-2008, 04:08 PM
Spivack:

Well starting in 1946, the Cubs have had 17 winning seasons.

That's right all of 17 in 62 years.

:rolleyes:

The Sox have had 35 in 62 years.

Does that help?

:D:

Lip

...and according to many Cub fans, it's all the fault of some billy goat curse. :rolleyes:

DSpivack
04-23-2008, 04:38 PM
Spivack:

Well starting in 1946, the Cubs have had 17 winning seasons.

That's right all of 17 in 62 years.

:rolleyes:

The Sox have had 35 in 62 years.

Does that help?

:D:

Lip

Here you go broken down into three era's

Pre 1901 won 1620 lost 1234
1901 - 1945 won 3796 lost 3022
post 1945 won 4583 lost 5209

Yep, thanks!

Scottzilla
04-23-2008, 04:53 PM
Does this include wins in the attendance race?
Teal is for the weak.

Lip Man 1
04-23-2008, 05:58 PM
White Sox 5137:

Your point about the Black Sox is an interesting one. This is from a story I did for WSI entitled "What If?"

THE ‘BLACK SOX’ SCANDAL

Sox author / historian Rich Lindberg has had an interesting take on this event. Lindberg’s contention was that if the White Sox hadn’t “thrown” the 1919 World Series and if eight players weren’t permanently suspended by then Commissioner Kenesaw “Mountain” Landis, the fabled New York Yankees ‘dynasty’ might never have come into being.

Baseball at that time was just beginning to see the value in the crowd appeal of the home run as authored by Babe Ruth but the ‘dead ball’ style of play was still firmly entrenched in the game. The White Sox personified this style with great pitching, blinding speed and slap hitters who advanced runners and scored just enough runs to win games. The Sox were the overwhelming favorites to beat the Reds in the 1919 World Series, had they done so they could also have repeated in 1920.

With less then a week remaining in the 1920 season the Sox trailed Cleveland by a half game for the pennant when the Black Sox scandal broke wide open. When detectives from the Illinois State’s Attorney’s office showed up in front of pitcher Eddie Cicotte’s house, owner Charles Comiskey had no choice but to suspend the eight accused players.

The Sox playing with mostly rookies and some of the ‘Clean Sox’ lost two of their final three games of the season to St. Louis allowing the Indians to back into the title.

What if the Sox had been clean? Well if the Sox win in both 1919 and perhaps 1920, baseball doesn’t feel as much need to add ‘excitement’ to the game in order to try to make fans forget the scandal. The baseball isn’t ‘juiced up,’ the ‘dead ball’ style remains played by a number of teams and the White Sox still with all their stars, like Buck Weaver and Joe Jackson, remain the only team that could have stopped the Yankees in the decade of the 1920's. Or at least won enough titles to prevent the dominance that developed by New York which would last basically unchecked through 1964.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=2&id=3435

Lip

Railsplitter
04-23-2008, 06:48 PM
Overall records at start of today

Cubs have won 9999 while losing 9465

Sox have won 8383 while losing 8190

Average wins per season: Cubs, 75.7
Sox, 78.2

vegyrex
04-23-2008, 08:47 PM
Spivack:

Well starting in 1946, the Cubs have had 17 winning seasons.

That's right all of 17 in 62 years.

:rolleyes:

The Sox have had 35 in 62 years.

Does that help?

:D:

Lip

Only 17 winning seasons. tsk, tsk.

It makes a nice bookend to the number of last place finishes they have: 16 :redneck

FourStarsTwoBars
04-23-2008, 09:00 PM
Average wins per season: Cubs, 75.7
Sox, 78.2

Prime example of how to lie with statistics.
So dividing wins by years played will get you those numbers.
Those are true statistics, those are the average number of wins per season.
Alas!
The National League wasn't playing a 162 game season in the 19th century
(66 games in 1876, 59 in '77, 60 in '78,...)
if you look at win percentage,
Cubs: .514
Sox .506

Historically, the Chicago (NL) won more often than Chicago (AL)

BRDSR
04-23-2008, 09:26 PM
if you look at win percentage,
Cubs: .514
Sox .506

Historically, the Chicago (NL) won more often than Chicago (AL)


http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/compneurolab/images/loudnoisesmall.jpg

LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FourStarsTwoBars
04-23-2008, 09:42 PM
Also
A team like the Bluejays averages 78.3 wins per season, but their winning percentage is under .500, at .496

DSpivack
04-23-2008, 09:52 PM
Also
A team like the Bluejays averages 78.3 wins per season, but their winning percentage is under .500, at .496

It might help to compare average wins versus average losses.

TommyJohn
04-23-2008, 10:10 PM
Spivack:

Well starting in 1946, the Cubs have had 17 winning seasons.

That's right all of 17 in 62 years.

:rolleyes:

The Sox have had 35 in 62 years.

Does that help?

:D:

Lip

Average wins per season: Cubs, 75.7
Sox, 78.2

Prime example of how to lie with statistics.
So dividing wins by years played will get you those numbers.
Those are true statistics, those are the average number of wins per season.
Alas!
The National League wasn't playing a 162 game season in the 19th century
(66 games in 1876, 59 in '77, 60 in '78,...)
if you look at win percentage,
Cubs: .514
Sox .506

Historically, the Chicago (NL) won more often than Chicago (AL)

As I once wrote in 2005, people can get numbers to say anything that they want them to say.

WhiteSox5187
04-23-2008, 10:44 PM
White Sox 5187:

Your point about the Black Sox is an interesting one. This is from a story I did for WSI entitled "What If?"

THE ‘BLACK SOX’ SCANDAL

Sox author / historian Rich Lindberg has had an interesting take on this event. Lindberg’s contention was that if the White Sox hadn’t “thrown” the 1919 World Series and if eight players weren’t permanently suspended by then Commissioner Kenesaw “Mountain” Landis, the fabled New York Yankees ‘dynasty’ might never have come into being.

Baseball at that time was just beginning to see the value in the crowd appeal of the home run as authored by Babe Ruth but the ‘dead ball’ style of play was still firmly entrenched in the game. The White Sox personified this style with great pitching, blinding speed and slap hitters who advanced runners and scored just enough runs to win games. The Sox were the overwhelming favorites to beat the Reds in the 1919 World Series, had they done so they could also have repeated in 1920.

With less then a week remaining in the 1920 season the Sox trailed Cleveland by a half game for the pennant when the Black Sox scandal broke wide open. When detectives from the Illinois State’s Attorney’s office showed up in front of pitcher Eddie Cicotte’s house, owner Charles Comiskey had no choice but to suspend the eight accused players.

The Sox playing with mostly rookies and some of the ‘Clean Sox’ lost two of their final three games of the season to St. Louis allowing the Indians to back into the title.

What if the Sox had been clean? Well if the Sox win in both 1919 and perhaps 1920, baseball doesn’t feel as much need to add ‘excitement’ to the game in order to try to make fans forget the scandal. The baseball isn’t ‘juiced up,’ the ‘dead ball’ style remains played by a number of teams and the White Sox still with all their stars, like Buck Weaver and Joe Jackson, remain the only team that could have stopped the Yankees in the decade of the 1920's. Or at least won enough titles to prevent the dominance that developed by New York which would last basically unchecked through 1964.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=2&id=3435

Lip

Fixed it for ya! You made me fifty years older than I really am!! :cool:

I remember reading that article and it was a damned good one Lip, but then most if not all of the ones you write are good so it comes as no surprise. I was talking about this with my dad and we couldn't really agree on it. We DID agree that we would have had a good if not GREAT team that would have dominated the first half of the 1920s, but as that team got older and the Yankees got better, would Comiskey have spent money on getting good prospects or still be the tightwad that he was and we would have collapsed in the '30s? I'm not sure when the Old Roman died, so...good question, but the only thing we can say is "What if??" hopefully we'll dominate the teens in this century too!

Scottiehaswheels
04-24-2008, 12:19 AM
Also
A team like the Bluejays averages 78.3 wins per season, but their winning percentage is under .500, at .496True, but they came into being in an era of 162 games a year compared to both Chicago teams...