PDA

View Full Version : How much will the Cubs outscore the Pirates this week?


chisoxmike
08-25-2008, 09:30 PM
So the Cubs play the Pirates this week. The team that's only purpose is to serve the Cubs. The Pirates stayed true to their core value by losing 12-3.

My question, how much will the Cubs outscore the Pirates.

I'm going to go with 35-7.

alohafri
08-25-2008, 09:47 PM
So the Cubs play the Pirates this week. The team that's only purpose is to serve the Cubs. The Pirates stayed true to their core value by losing 12-3.

My question, how much will the Cubs outscore the Pirates.

I'm going to go with 35-7.

I told a cub fan at work, who, for some reason, was worried about this series, that they would win by scoring 15 runs a game. They only scored 12 tonight, but I am going to stick by the 45 total run prediction.

DumpJerry
08-25-2008, 09:50 PM
It does not matter. It will be the White Sox, not the Pirates, they face in the World Series.








They will wish it was the Pirates after we're done with them.

btrain929
08-25-2008, 11:41 PM
I'm never going to get back the 4 seconds of my life I wasted by opening this thread.....:whiner:

DumpJerry
08-26-2008, 06:58 AM
I'm never going to get back the 4 seconds of my life I wasted by opening this thread.....:whiner:
Yeah, the title was misleading........:scratch:

kraut83
08-26-2008, 08:03 AM
I've been thinking that their schedule is a cakewalk with the Nats, Pirates and Reds, but then I realized that it's as simple as the National League really sucking ass this year.

Jerko
08-26-2008, 09:03 AM
I've been thinking that their schedule is a cakewalk with the Nats, Pirates and Reds, but then I realized that it's as simple as the National League really sucking ass this year.

I'm starting to think their schedule may be what eventually does them in. I know you have to beat who you play, but they've been basically coasting since that Brewers series. Teams like the Reds and Pirates are even WORSE this time of year since they were both "sellers", and it seems the Cubs haven't played a "meaningful" game in weeks. When things tense up and everyone is on an even level again, we'll see if the pucker factor kicks in like it did last year.

Demafrost
08-26-2008, 10:15 AM
Seriously, the Cubs record is such a fluke. The worst teams in the AL are about the quality of the mid-level teams in the NL. I don't think the Royals or A's are that much worse than a team like the Astros which is hovering around .500 in the NL. The Cubs get about 50 games a year against teams like the Padres, Nationals, Pirates, and Reds, who between them have a grand total of 1 ace quality pitcher (Peavy), 1 very good pitcher (Volquez), and then mostly a bunch of starters who wouldn't start on any halfway respectable team.

Don't get me wrong, the Cubs are a damn good team and would compete in the AL, but to say they are clearly better than the White Sox would most likely be incorrect.

But you guys already knew that :)

ImaGrinder
08-26-2008, 10:53 AM
As good of a team we have--and as much as I'd like to say the Cubs are a fluke--a run differential of over +170 indicates that while the NL may have some pretty bad teams, the Flubbies are not squeaking by the hairs on their chinny chin chins; they are beating the living snot out of them.

If there is one NL team I am legitimately concerned about playing if we make the World Series (on quality of team alone) it is the Cubs. Every other NL team has at least one obvious flaw.

Boy would the city would tear itself apart in a crosstown World Series, though. :o:

kraut83
08-26-2008, 11:08 AM
I'm starting to think their schedule may be what eventually does them in. I know you have to beat who you play, but they've been basically coasting since that Brewers series. Teams like the Reds and Pirates are even WORSE this time of year since they were both "sellers", and it seems the Cubs haven't played a "meaningful" game in weeks. When things tense up and everyone is on an even level again, we'll see if the pucker factor kicks in like it did last year.

I agree. Outside of 3 with St. Louis, their August schedule has been pathetic. They have the Phils this weekend, and a pretty difficult last 2 weeks of September.

I still think they are a lock for the playoffs, but could really stumble when they're playing for something again.

areilly
08-26-2008, 11:43 AM
They will wish it was the Pirates after we're done with them.

Yeah, I'm surprised the Cubs didn't just save themselves the postseason embarrassment by shooting themselves in the face after that 3-3 beatdown the Sox handed them.

:rolleyes:

ImaGrinder
08-26-2008, 12:00 PM
Yeah, I'm surprised the Cubs didn't just save themselves the postseason embarrassment by shooting themselves in the face after that 3-3 beatdown the Sox handed them.

:rolleyes:

The best part was how they had both Zambrano and Harden in their rotation for both series and how hard we hit both of them when they did pitch.

Goodman6
08-26-2008, 01:35 PM
The best part was how they had both Zambrano and Harden in their rotation for both series and how hard we hit both of them when they did pitch.

Actually, the White Sox beat Harden the only time they faced him this year, when he was with Oakland. Zambrano has been no mystery to Sox hitters over the years as his lifetime ERA vs. the Sox is a not very impressive 4.60 (31 ER in 60 2/3 IP). In fact, the only Cubs pitcher the watered down Sox line-up beat in 2007 was Zambrano. I am not interested in starting a debate over this, I am just stating some facts.

munchman33
08-26-2008, 01:37 PM
It does not matter. It will be the White Sox, not the Pirates, they face in the World Series.


Mark my words...the Cubs will have a much harder time facing Arizona in the playoffs than we will the Angels. I don't particularly like either teams chances of making the WS, but I like our chances more.

kittle42
08-26-2008, 02:19 PM
Mark my words...the Cubs will have a much harder time facing Arizona in the playoffs than we will the Angels. I don't particularly like either teams chances of making the WS, but I like our chances more.

The Diamondbacks are the only team that can take them down in the NL, in my opinion. They'd have to just hope for lights-out performances from Webb, Haren, and Johnson, and hope that they can eek out a run more than the beloved Cub - and I'd much prefer that be in a 5-game series than a 7-gamer.

In my office pool, I took Cubs v. Angels world series. Obviously, I put my money opposite my rooting interests.

munchman33
08-26-2008, 02:26 PM
The Diamondbacks are the only team that can take them down in the NL, in my opinion. They'd have to just hope for lights-out performances from Webb, Haren, and Johnson, and hope that they can eek out a run more than the beloved Cub - and I'd much prefer that be in a 5-game series than a 7-gamer.

In my office pool, I took Cubs v. Angels world series. Obviously, I put my money opposite my rooting interests.

In a five game series, you have to favor the Diamondbacks. And don't forgot the different look to their lineup with Adam Dunn now.

kittle42
08-26-2008, 02:30 PM
In a five game series, you have to favor the Diamondbacks. And don't forgot the different look to their lineup with Adam Dunn now.

Come now, they wouldn't be favored, especially with the Cubs getting home-field advantage. That's just silly. Zambrano, Dempster, Harden line up pretty well with Webb, Haren, Johnson, and the Cubs have a much better offense.

I'd say the series would be at something like Cubs -160.

daveeym
08-26-2008, 02:54 PM
Come now, they wouldn't be favored, especially with the Cubs getting home-field advantage. That's just silly. Zambrano, Dempster, Harden line up pretty well with Webb, Haren, Johnson, and the Cubs have a much better offense.

I'd say the series would be at something like Cubs -160.
You can't look at lines when the cubs are involved, too many nutjobs driving it.

ImaGrinder
08-26-2008, 05:30 PM
Actually, the White Sox beat Harden the only time they faced him this year, when he was with Oakland. Zambrano has been no mystery to Sox hitters over the years as his lifetime ERA vs. the Sox is a not very impressive 4.60 (31 ER in 60 2/3 IP). In fact, the only Cubs pitcher the watered down Sox line-up beat in 2007 was Zambrano. I am not interested in starting a debate over this, I am just stating some facts.

I hear ya, I'd still much rather take my chances against 2 pitchers that aren't Zambrano or Harden if I'm playing the Cubs. Just like they would certainly not want to see Danks and Javy, even though they beat Javy around this year.

ImaGrinder
08-26-2008, 05:33 PM
In a five game series, you have to favor the Diamondbacks. And don't forgot the different look to their lineup with Adam Dunn now.

That's kind of a ridiculous thing to say, don't you think?

The Cubs have a vastly superior offense and a better bullpen overall. I would give the very slight edge in starting pitching (Randy Johnson's unwavering domiantion of them playing a large role) to the Diamondbacks--but playing the first two games at that landfill on Clark and Addison doesn't bode well for any team in the NL.

PatK
08-27-2008, 09:00 AM
Jesus, the Pirates are an embarrassment to the sport of baseball.

I wish the Sox got to play a team that sucked that badly 15 times a season.

ImaGrinder
08-27-2008, 11:08 AM
Jesus, the Pirates are an embarrassment to the sport of baseball.

I wish the Sox got to play a team that sucked that badly 15 times a season.

The Royals are pretty bad almost every year.

Also, until they gave away their 2 best hitters, the Pirates we're pretty close (or above) a .500 record against all teams not named the Chicago Flubs.

All that said, it's fun watching that wack job Zambrano get roughed up, even if he continues to hit like a position player.

PatK
08-27-2008, 11:25 AM
The Royals are pretty bad almost every year.

Also, until they gave away their 2 best hitters, the Pirates we're pretty close (or above) a .500 record against all teams not named the Chicago Flubs.

All that said, it's fun watching that wack job Zambrano get roughed up, even if he continues to hit like a position player.

The Royals were pretty good in '03, and at least recently, they have made attempts to field a decent team the last year.

The Pirates seem like they just don't give a rat's ass.

ImaGrinder
08-27-2008, 01:07 PM
The Royals were pretty good in '03, and at least recently, they have made attempts to field a decent team the last year.

The Pirates seem like they just don't give a rat's ass.

They probably don't.

Nady and Bay traded within (I believe) a week of each other, no pitching whatsoever and Dark Lord of the Sith (see his mlb.com picture) as their starting catcher.

Life is not good in Pittsburgh.