PDA

View Full Version : Reds 17-7


Whitesox029
04-29-2006, 08:10 PM
This team reminds me of the '03 Royals. Do you think they will they finish above .500? Higher than 5th place? It's hard to tell whether Milwaukee or the North Side club is better, but right now the Reds look better than both of them. Your thoughts please...

As an added side note, This means that the teams with the best records in each league right now were the charter members of their respective leagues.

MUsoxfan
04-29-2006, 08:13 PM
They can certainly hit. Pitching will be their eventual downfall. I say they win 83 games

WinOrDyeTrying
04-29-2006, 08:19 PM
They can certainly hit. Pitching will be their eventual downfall. I say they win 83 games

Ill set the over/under at 85 wins

buehrle4cy05
04-29-2006, 08:21 PM
Unless they acquire another pitcher, they'll finish with around 80-85 wins.

Lip Man 1
04-30-2006, 01:14 AM
As long as they finish higher then the Cubs I don't care how many wins they have.

Lip

Chicken Dinner
04-30-2006, 03:09 AM
As long as they finish higher then the Cubs I don't care how many wins they have.

Lip

diddo

TDog
04-30-2006, 04:37 AM
The 1977 White Sox won 90 games with questionable pitching and defense. They simply outscored the other team when they weren't passing each other on the basepaths. Sometimes teams have unusually fun seasons.

Having seen what it's like to have pitching, though, I wouldn't want go back.

TornLabrum
04-30-2006, 09:14 AM
diddo

Any relation to dido?

MrRoboto83
04-30-2006, 01:43 PM
After we sweep them in June, they will swoon.

Optipessimism
04-30-2006, 11:19 PM
There's no way they can compete with Houston over the long haul IMO. The best they can hope for is second, but Milwaukee has a potent offense and better pitching, St. Louis will stick near the top, and even the Cubs have a better pitching staff. I know they have a bunch of great hitters over there, but no matter what, because of the lack of pitching they aren't going anywhere anyway, even if they are able to find a way to sneak into the Wildcard slot.

chisoxmike
04-30-2006, 11:34 PM
The Reds will fall.

Banix12
04-30-2006, 11:39 PM
I say they finish right around .500, maybe under. That pitching staff just won't cut it. Arroyo will fall back to earth sooner or later. So will Brandon Phillips who is playing waaaayyy over his head right now.

While I don't have a lot of confidence in their ability to keep it up, I would actually love it if they were able to string this together for a full season and win the division. I'd like to see some change there.

Chips
04-30-2006, 11:45 PM
Ill set the over/under at 85 wins

I'll take the over.

QCIASOXFAN
05-01-2006, 01:24 AM
That is pretty crazy that they have that many wins! I will take the over also, there offense will keep them in enough ballgames to win.

Whitesox029
05-01-2006, 01:54 AM
There's no way they can compete with Houston over the long haul IMO. The best they can hope for is second, but Milwaukee has a potent offense and better pitching, St. Louis will stick near the top, and even the Cubs have a better pitching staff. I know they have a bunch of great hitters over there, but no matter what, because of the lack of pitching they aren't going anywhere anyway, even if they are able to find a way to sneak into the Wildcard slot.
Even that is giving them too much credit. The way I see it, the Cardinals are going to walk away with that division the way they have the last two years. The Astros will be good for 2nd and will contend for the wild card. After that, it's up for grabs. I could see the Reds taking 3rd. Actually I could see Cincinnati, Milwaukee and the Flubs finishing in any order, 3,4,5 in the division. The Pirates, of course, will be 6th.

palehozenychicty
05-02-2006, 04:41 PM
beat Cards with Valentin single in 9th. move up to 19-8.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/gamecenter/recap/MLB_20060502_STL@CIN (http://http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/gamecenter/recap/MLB_20060502_STL@CIN)

kraut83
05-02-2006, 04:48 PM
19-8 Reds = pathetic National League.

palehozenychicty
05-02-2006, 04:50 PM
19-8 Reds = pathetic National League.

The NL is a joke, but give Krivsky credit. He actually has the stones to try and make them respectable, unlike the Pirates/Royals.

Chicken Dinner
05-02-2006, 05:38 PM
I like it.....let the big red machine roll.

Rooney4Prez56
05-03-2006, 12:45 PM
Baseball is built for mediocre teams to rise to the top and better teams to fall lower, like a convection current, with the draft and free agency. The Reds are almost ready to get to the top. I won't believe in them this year, but give 'em a year or two and they could be one of the best.

Hangar18
05-03-2006, 12:51 PM
19-8 Reds = pathetic National League.

HEH HEHH HEH HEHEH

Couldnt have said it any better. They are the Phoniest 19-8 team
Ive seen in Years.

Johnny Mostil
05-03-2006, 01:17 PM
HEH HEHH HEH HEHEH

Couldnt have said it any better. They are the Phoniest 19-8 team
Ive seen in Years.

How far back in time are you going? Are they phonier than the '76 Rangers (started 19-8 but finished 76-86), the '78 Athletics (started 19-8 but finished 69-93), or the '97 Rockies (started 19-8 but finished 83-79)?

I'm guessing they'll fall--gutsy guess for a team playing .704 ball in the early season, no?--but I won't guess how far . . .

Hangar18
05-03-2006, 01:29 PM
How far back in time are you going? Are they phonier than the '76 Rangers (started 19-8 but finished 76-86), the '78 Athletics (started 19-8 but finished 69-93), or the '97 Rockies (started 19-8 but finished 83-79)?

I'm guessing they'll fall--gutsy guess for a team playing .704 ball in the early season, no?--but I won't guess how far . . .

Im betting they fall FLATTER than the teams you just mentioned. They will become the benchmark

gobears1987
05-03-2006, 01:31 PM
Im betting they fall FLATTER than the teams you just mentioned. They will become the benchmarkWith there pitching staff, that assessment is more than justified.

Johnny Mostil
05-03-2006, 02:29 PM
With there pitching staff, that assessment is more than justified.

Fair point about the pitching. '76 Rangers and '78 Athletics had (IMO) better pitching. ('97 Rockies may not have, but I suppose that doesn't much matter in Denver.) But I'm not sure the '06 Reds have worse bats than the '78 Athletics. And assuming they were to sweep their last 14 games against the Cubs:rolleyes: (yes, I know they're only 3-2 against them so far), they would only need 37 more wins to do better than the '78 Athletics . . .

But, what the hey, if I really knew anything about this, I'd be at a sports book . . .

Murphy10
05-03-2006, 11:51 PM
Theyll go .500 finishing behind St. Louis, Houston, and Milwaukee.