PDA

View Full Version : Good Games Begin Tomorrow


CHEESESOXER
05-25-2006, 06:57 PM
I've been watching the schedule as, the Tigers have had it really easy such as cruising through KC while the Sox played some better teams.

We start three series in a row now, The BJ's, the Tribe next and then get to have at the Tigers.

It's going to be somewhat strange rooting for the yankoffs but, I guess we'll take the help.

We'll be in first place by the end of next week.

RowanDye
05-25-2006, 06:59 PM
Let's just hope we're in 1st place at the end of the year.

MarySwiss
05-25-2006, 07:00 PM
I've been watching the schedule as, the Tigers have had it really easy such as cruising through KC while the Sox played some better teams.

We start three series in a row now, The BJ's, the Tribe next and then get to have at the Tigers.

It's going to be somewhat strange rooting for the yankoffs but, I guess we'll take the help.

We'll be in first place by the end of next week.
That'll be nice, but I don't really care. As long as we're in first place at the end of the season! :wink:

bigsqwert
05-25-2006, 07:29 PM
The Tigers have had it really easy such as cruising through KC while the Sox played some better teams.


Haven't we played KC more times than Detroit has so far?

rainbow6
05-25-2006, 08:10 PM
If my math is correct - someone feel free to double check me - the Tigers have played a stunning 30 games thus far against teams with a losing record...don't know about the Sox...hang on....

Luke

IlliniSox4Life
05-25-2006, 08:15 PM
If my math is correct - someone feel free to double check me - the Tigers have played a stunning 30 games thus far against teams with a losing record...don't know about the Sox...hang on....

Luke

The flaw I always found in this is that the teams with the best records will have easier schedules simply because they factor in the games they won against them. That said if the Sox have a almost identical record to the Tigers and the Tigers have played substantially more games against sub .500 teams, than you can read something into that. I'm just saying in general, I don't put a lot of faith into looking at strength of schedule.

spiffie
05-25-2006, 08:17 PM
The flaw I always found in this is that the teams with the best records will have easier schedules simply because they factor in the games they won against them. That said if the Sox have a almost identical record to the Tigers and the Tigers have played substantially more games against sub .500 teams, than you can read something into that. I'm just saying in general, I don't put a lot of faith into looking at strength of schedule.
That's good, because here's a thought for the day. The Sox SOS is the lowest in baseball. Our opponents have a .458 winning percentage. Detroit's is also below .500, but not quite as low as ours.

So basically the idea that they're ahead because they've had an easier schedule is kind of bunk.

rainbow6
05-25-2006, 08:18 PM
Ok - I think I'm cracking up...I count 36 of our games so far against teams with sub-.500 records. Does every team in baseball suck? The only teams we've played that are .500 or above are Cleveland, Toronto and Detroit...we are 7-4 against those teams.

I'm going to stop looking this stuff up.

Luke

Hitmen77
05-25-2006, 09:03 PM
Saying we're playing teams above or below .500 is not a good measure on it's own. Take that Tampa Bay series, we faced Kazmir and Hendrickson - two tough starters with very low ERAs. Not very indicative of playing a last-place team. Didn't Minnesota juggle their rotation so that we'd face Santana? Also, the Twins were on something like a 6 out of 7 victory roll when we lost the first 2 to them. Conversly, I know the Royals have been bad all year, but isn't Detroit catching them in total free-fall?

I'm not implying that Detroit's had it easier than us to date. For all I know their fans can point to a bunch of similar circumstances for their team. My point it you can't really look at winning pct. when you can end up playing certain "bad" teams when they are hot or when your facing the heart of their rotation.

RowanDye
05-25-2006, 09:16 PM
We swept the Tiggers and they're still ahead of us in the standings after playing a lot of the same teams. We have to take care of business against sub-par teams, but they still have to come through us if they want a piece of the central division.

bluestar
05-25-2006, 10:14 PM
Saying we're playing teams above or below .500 is not a good measure on it's own. Take that Tampa Bay series, we faced Kazmir and Hendrickson - two tough starters with very low ERAs. Not very indicative of playing a last-place team. Didn't Minnesota juggle their rotation so that we'd face Santana? Also, the Twins were on something like a 6 out of 7 victory roll when we lost the first 2 to them. Conversly, I know the Royals have been bad all year, but isn't Detroit catching them in total free-fall?

I'm not implying that Detroit's had it easier than us to date. For all I know their fans can point to a bunch of similar circumstances for their team. My point it you can't really look at winning pct. when you can end up playing certain "bad" teams when they are hot or when your facing the heart of their rotation.

Another good example is coming up. Detroit will get to face Westbrook, Byrd and Johnson in the upcoming series with Cleveland, while the Sox will then have to face Lee, Sabathia, and Westbrook.

CHISOXFAN13
05-25-2006, 10:48 PM
Ok - I think I'm cracking up...I count 36 of our games so far against teams with sub-.500 records. Does every team in baseball suck? The only teams we've played that are .500 or above are Cleveland, Toronto and Detroit...we are 7-4 against those teams.

I'm going to stop looking this stuff up.

Luke

The Tigers are 19 games over .500 and the Sox are 31-15. It's a pretty easy concept to figure out why all those teams have losing records. They all lose to the Sox and Tigers.

It's one of the things that makes me cringe when people talk about a weak schedule. It's weak because the Sox and Detroit have kicked the crap out them all season.

sullythered
05-25-2006, 10:53 PM
Let's just whip the kittens next week like we did in detoilet. End of story.

Hitmen77
05-25-2006, 10:55 PM
Another good example is coming up. Detroit will get to face Westbrook, Byrd and Johnson in the upcoming series with Cleveland, while the Sox will then have to face Lee, Sabathia, and Westbrook.

Great! :(: Hopefully that'll all even out over the course of a season.

The Tigers are 19 games over .500 and the Sox are 31-15. It's a pretty easy concept to figure out why all those teams have losing records. They all lose to the Sox and Tigers.

It's one of the things that makes me cringe when people talk about a weak schedule. It's weak because the Sox and Detroit have kicked the crap out them all season.

Right now, I really don't much in the way of Sox players playing way better their norms. If fact, our bullpen has struggled, Garland has struggled, Contreras missed 2 starts to the DL, we've been in what I see as a bit of a "defensive slump" lately with uncharacteristic errors by the likes of Crede and Uribe that have cost us some games, we have 2 starters hitting less than .200. And yet, we're still on pace to win 107 games. Okay, so Thome probably won't hit 65 HRs. But he, Paulie, Dye, they're hitting around .300 - hardly unsustainable. If the Sox keep doing what they've been doing, they shouldn't have to worry about a playoff berth.

Tragg
05-25-2006, 10:58 PM
It's going to be somewhat strange rooting for the yankoffs but, I guess we'll take the help.

.
It's almost that time of year when we become Cub fans: interleague play and specifically, Central v. Central (maybe not fan, but root for them to win a few games)

kingpin_rcs
05-26-2006, 01:00 AM
The flaw I always found in this is that the teams with the best records will have easier schedules simply because they factor in the games they won against them. That said if the Sox have a almost identical record to the Tigers and the Tigers have played substantially more games against sub .500 teams, than you can read something into that. I'm just saying in general, I don't put a lot of faith into looking at strength of schedule.

Doing it the way I think most poeple would do it is to look at the teams the Sox or Tigers have played then look at those teams records as of today to determine if they have played winning or losing teams. But, as you say the Sox and Tigers factor into that. If the Indians were 3 games over .500 and then swept by the Sox in a four game series you would look at that and say the Sox have played a sub .500 team. However, they were over .500 before they played the Sox.

It would be more accurate, but much harder to figure, if you consider the record of the teams before each game. So, in my example above the Sox would have played 3 games against a .500 or better team and 1 game against a sub .500 team.

NoNeckEra
05-26-2006, 03:38 PM
It's almost that time of year when we become Cub fans: interleague play and specifically, Central v. Central (maybe not fan, but root for them to win a few games)
Sorry, not going to happen(me rooting for the Cubs). It would have to be the last week of the season. Certain things are foreign to my system.

CHEESESOXER
05-30-2006, 11:26 AM
Before I get banned for whatever, I want to say that the topic of this thread seems accurate now.

We're on our way UP^^^^^^^^^

Palehose13
05-30-2006, 11:49 AM
Before I get banned for whatever, I want to say that the topic of this thread seems accurate now.

We're on our way UP^^^^^^^^^

You won't get banned if you follow the site guidelines. Is this a concept that is really that hard to understand?