Being a know-nothing-about-baseball guy who watches the cubs avidly on
some Chicago TV station whenever I visit US and I am a regular visitor
to MLB's website, I have the following questions:-

1. With 40 games to go, the cubs stand 3.5 games ahead of the
brewers. That seems small but would I be right in concluding that as
the brewers seem hot right now and that bubble should burst sooner or
later, and the cubs seem to be doing what they have been doing all
season, that 3.5 gap is actually a large one?

2. Right now the cubs seem certain of reaching the championship
series, or whatever you call it, at least. Does their major threat of
reaching the world series come from their own division or should the
mets and phillies be taken a lot more seriously?

3. The angels have the best record in MLB currently. I have already
discounted them from being a possible world series contender for no
reason at all, favouring the rays just ahead of the lesser of
chicago's teams (sarcasm). Would I be right?

4. If I am right, that means the cubs and rays would fight out the
world series. I want the cubs to win but given they were swept by the
rays earlier, is a major improvement required for the cubs to end
their WS drought and are they capable of such an improvement?

and finally.
5. Have I confirmed my know-nothing-about-baseballness or should I
give myself a little more credit?

On Aug 14, 6:28 am, Newton Heath <newton.heat...@googlemail.com>
wrote:

> and finally.
> 5.  Have I confirmed my know-nothing-about-baseballness or should I
> give myself a little more credit?

Not at all. I see a lot dumber questions asked in this newsgroup.

You just got to wait & see what happens.

The old geezer

Newton Heath wrote:

>
> 1. With 40 games to go, the cubs stand 3.5 games ahead of the
> brewers. That seems small but would I be right in concluding that as
> the brewers seem hot right now and that bubble should burst sooner or
> later, and the cubs seem to be doing what they have been doing all
> season, that 3.5 gap is actually a large one?

Remember that the Brewers end the season against the Cubs and play 6
games in the final few weeks. This division is not won yet.

>
> 2. Right now the cubs seem certain of reaching the championship
> series, or whatever you call it, at least. Does their major threat of
> reaching the world series come from their own division or should the
> mets and phillies be taken a lot more seriously?

Don't get ahead of yourself, the cubs need to *MAKE* the playoffs and
win the first series to start thinking of that. Remember the Rockies
last year, at this time of the year they were considered out of the
race, then they win 22 of 23 to make the playoffs.

>
> 3. The angels have the best record in MLB currently. I have already
> driscounted them from being a possible world series contender fo no
> reason at all, favouring the rays just ahead of the lesser of
> chicago's teams (sarcasm). Would I be right?

No, the best team in the AL is definitely the Angels.

>
> 4. If I am right, that means the cubs and rays would fight out the
> world series. I want the cubs to win but given they were swept by the
> rays earlier, is a major improvement required for the cubs to end
> their WS drought and are they capable of such an improvement?

Well, August 18th Rays and Angels face off, we will see which team is
better this late in the year, if I was a betting man, my money would be
on the Angels... No offense to the Rays, they have a great team but.....

>
> and finally.
> 5. Have I confirmed my know-nothing-about-baseballness or should I
> give myself a little more credit?

They are all valid questions.

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:28:59 -0700 (PDT), Newton Heath
<newton.heath07@googlemail.com> wrote:

>Being a know-nothing-about-baseball guy who watches the cubs avidly on
>some Chicago TV station whenever I visit US and I am a regular visitor
>to MLB's website, I have the following questions:-
>
>1. With 40 games to go, the cubs stand 3.5 games ahead of the
>brewers. That seems small but would I be right in concluding that as
>the brewers seem hot right now and that bubble should burst sooner or
>later, and the cubs seem to be doing what they have been doing all
>season, that 3.5 gap is actually a large one?
>
>2. Right now the cubs seem certain of reaching the championship
>series, or whatever you call it, at least. Does their major threat of
>reaching the world series come from their own division or should the
>mets and phillies be taken a lot more seriously?
>
>3. The angels have the best record in MLB currently. I have already
>discounted them from being a possible world series contender for no
>reason at all, favouring the rays just ahead of the lesser of
>chicago's teams (sarcasm). Would I be right?
>
>4. If I am right, that means the cubs and rays would fight out the
>world series. I want the cubs to win but given they were swept by the
>rays earlier, is a major improvement required for the cubs to end
>their WS drought and are they capable of such an improvement?
>
>and finally.
>5. Have I confirmed my know-nothing-about-baseballness or should I
>give myself a little more credit?


All good questions and you know more about baseball than a lot of
people here in the US.

1. It ain't over til it's over. As long as the Cubs keep doing what
they are doing, they should be fine. Winning two games out of every
three should keep them in the lead. There are still some variables
that could hurt them, but even if they are tied with the Brewers when
they meet for those last games of the season, 2 of 3 still puts them
on top.

2. Any team can beat you. Even if the Cubs win their division, they
could still get knocked out of the post-season by a weaker team.

3. The only reason I see that the Angels won't be the AL
representative is covered in answer #2.

4. There is always room for improvement, but making changes just for
the sake of change can often do more harm than good. The Cubs have a
solid team that, for the most part, plays solid baseball. Lou is a
good manager. Are they good enough? We'll see.

5. I'd say you are well on your way to being able to hold your own in
a baseball conversation. How long have you been a fan?

"Newton Heath" <newton.heath07@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:a0714449-2c04-43ad-85c5-b6761444801d@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Being a know-nothing-about-baseball guy who watches the cubs avidly on
> some Chicago TV station whenever I visit US and I am a regular visitor
> to MLB's website, I have the following questions:-
>
> 1. With 40 games to go, the cubs stand 3.5 games ahead of the
> brewers. That seems small but would I be right in concluding that as
> the brewers seem hot right now and that bubble should burst sooner or
> later, and the cubs seem to be doing what they have been doing all
> season, that 3.5 gap is actually a large one?
>
> 2. Right now the cubs seem certain of reaching the championship
> series, or whatever you call it, at least. Does their major threat of
> reaching the world series come from their own division or should the
> mets and phillies be taken a lot more seriously?
>
> 3. The angels have the best record in MLB currently. I have already
> discounted them from being a possible world series contender for no
> reason at all, favouring the rays just ahead of the lesser of
> chicago's teams (sarcasm). Would I be right?
>
> 4. If I am right, that means the cubs and rays would fight out the
> world series. I want the cubs to win but given they were swept by the
> rays earlier, is a major improvement required for the cubs to end
> their WS drought and are they capable of such an improvement?


Put your worries to rest. I'm a transplanted Chicagoan living in Florida
since 1992 after 50 some years in Chicago.

We always take in one Cub series every year, either Atlanta or Miami. This
year due to inter-league play there was this Rays/Cubs series. We made our
anual pilmigradge there this year as it's only 100 miles instead of a few
hundred.

Well you know the rest of the story. If the Cubs do end up in the World
Series, I promise to watch on TV and not attend in person, where ever they
play.



> and finally.
> 5. Have I confirmed my know-nothing-about-baseballness or should I
> give myself a little more credit?

Newton,

I'm probably one of the infrequent posters here who typify the comment "I
see a lot dumber questions asked in this newsgroup". And that's ok. I love
the Cubs, I'm 60, and their last appearance in the World Series was 5 years
before I was born, their last world championship 13 years before my father
was born. I'll ask a dumb one, and if I'm lucky will get 1 or 2 responses.
Or I'll recommend a book and be totally ignored. It's okay. The folks here
are extremely expert, and don't suffer fools too gladly, for the most part.

So having said that, take this with a grain of salt. But I want to amplify
on the responses here. Notice the final post where Ray says he won't attend
a game in person. I imagine you understand that this is a semi-serious
expression of an old baseball tradition, called superstition. The reason
ball players and their fans tend toward superstition is that baseball,
unlike most major sports (certainly unlike cricket), is predicated on
failure. A great hitter need only be sure NOT to fail no more than 2 out of
every 3 (roughly) attempts (i.e. .333 hitting is superb). Given this element
of the game, when success does come, it frequently seems to be a gift from
the gods, nothing more. And if such fortune should smile in one of the
famout "streaks" that are so marvelous to the sport, then maybe it WAS
because I wore a certain hat, drank from a particular cup, or didn't watch
the game.

But the idea is that after the long haul of a full season, 162 games, this
tremendous element of chance eventually evens itself out, and the truly
better team emerges. Trouble is, injuries, trades, and other factors
frequently result in a team playing the post-season's handful of games under
significantly different circumstances than it played most of the season.

Now, from the start of post-season play amongst 8 teams (consisting of the
Division Series best of 5, Chanpionship Series best of 7, and World Series
best of 7), the first team to win just 11 games takes home all the marbles.
There's just no way this will necessarily reflect the best team, either at
the end of the season, due to the fact of chance explained above, or over
the entire season, due to the sheer number of games necessary to average out
all the random elements but then factoring in injuries, trades, and what
have you.

Thus, the baseball championship has and will continue to be, a real
crapshoot. Occasionally a team, such as the Yankees, will so dominate play
that a true dynasty will emerge and be seen as the superior team. Usually,
though, we live in an uncertain world.

UNCERTAIN THAT IS, ACCEPT FOR ONE INDISPUTABLE FACT, AND THIS IS THAT ONE
EXPECTS CUB SUCCESS IN VAIN AND AT THE PERIL OF ONE'S SANITY. BE WARNED!

On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 23:11:20 -0400, "Sammy Taylor"
<thetoolsafe@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Newton,
>
>I'm probably one of the infrequent posters here who typify the comment "I
>see a lot dumber questions asked in this newsgroup". And that's ok. I love
>the Cubs, I'm 60, and their last appearance in the World Series was 5 years
>before I was born, their last world championship 13 years before my father
>was born. I'll ask a dumb one, and if I'm lucky will get 1 or 2 responses.
>Or I'll recommend a book and be totally ignored. It's okay. The folks here
>are extremely expert, and don't suffer fools too gladly, for the most part.
>
>So having said that, take this with a grain of salt. But I want to amplify
>on the responses here. Notice the final post where Ray says he won't attend
>a game in person.

I thought I had been posting while drunk again since I didn't recall
saying this. Went back and checked and I didn't...it was Bishoop.

No worries, though. I rarely attend games because I am a jinx myself.
However, if I am at a game and they are down in the late innings, I
leave and they usually come back to win.

The odds of me getting tickets to a playoff or World Series game are
about equal to the odds of Eva Mendes showing up at my door and asking
me to give her a full body massage so if they lose it won't because I
am in the stands.

On 14 Aug, 16:28, Ray <chigarayREM...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:28:59 -0700 (PDT), Newton Heath
>
>
>
>
>
> <newton.heat...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >Being a know-nothing-about-baseball guy who watches the cubs avidly on
> >some Chicago TV station whenever I visit US and I am a regular visitor
> >to MLB's website, I have the following questions:-
>
> >1. With 40 games to go, the cubs stand 3.5 games ahead of the
> >brewers.  That seems small but would I be right in concluding that as
> >the brewers seem hot right now and that bubble should burst sooner or
> >later, and the cubs seem to be doing what they have been doing all
> >season, that 3.5 gap is actually a large one?
>
> >2.  Right now the cubs seem certain of reaching the championship
> >series, or whatever you call it, at least.  Does their major threat of
> >reaching the world series come from their own division or should the
> >mets and phillies be taken a lot more seriously?
>
> >3. The angels have the best record in MLB currently.  I have already
> >discounted them from being a possible world series contender for no
> >reason at all, favouring the rays just ahead of the lesser of
> >chicago's teams (sarcasm).  Would I be right?
>
> >4.  If I am right, that means the cubs and rays would fight out the
> >world series.  I want the cubs to win but given they were swept by the
> >rays earlier, is a major improvement required for the cubs to end
> >their WS drought and are they capable of such an improvement?
>
> >and finally.
> >5.  Have I confirmed my know-nothing-about-baseballness or should I
> >give myself a little more credit?
>
> All good questions and you know more about baseball than a lot of
> people here in the US.
>
> 1.  It ain't over til it's over. As long as the Cubs keep doing what
> they are doing, they should be fine. Winning two games out of every
> three should keep them in the lead. There are still some variables
> that could hurt them, but even if they are tied with the Brewers when
> they meet for those last games of the season, 2 of 3 still puts them
> on top.
>
> 2. Any team can beat you. Even if the Cubs win their division, they
> could still get knocked out of the post-season by a weaker team.
>
> 3. The only reason I see that the Angels won't be the AL
> representative is covered in answer #2.
>
> 4. There is always room for improvement, but making changes just for
> the sake of change can often do more harm than good. The Cubs have a
> solid team that, for the most part, plays solid baseball. Lou is a
> good manager. Are they good enough? We'll see.
>
> 5. I'd say you are well on your way to being able to hold your own in
> a baseball conversation. How long have you been a fan?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

1. The number of games remaining is the biggest variable of all from
where I'm sitting. For as long as I can remember the gap has been
between 3 and 6 games. That is consistently keeping your rivals at
arms length. They say over here the games coming up could be
significant (cub's apparant tougher run-in against play off
contenders). This supposed post all star game slump hasn't showed
signs of materialising yet and maybe it just won't happen. Based on
that, I expect those final games against the brewers will define the
brewers' season more than the cubs.

2. The pitching rotation means you play for and against a different
team every day. For that reason I think a .500+ season is a good
season but a 600+ a great season. The playoffs can be a lottery I
know but more often than not the best teams win. Unless of course
that team is Detroit.

3. My problem with the angels has nothing to do with baseball as
such. It is about coverage. Over here it is "the red sox did this,
the cubs have a quaint stadium, the cards did that and the yankees did
nothing". And there's "the rays look good and the angels come from
Los Angeles AND Anaheim. How is that?" As we get live feeds from
ESPN on sundays and wednesdays, and it is normaly tomorrow and just
hours before work, I am in bed and miss the more constructive angels
stuff, if they bother of course.

4. I'm not talking about changes. I'm talking about raising their
already impressive "A" game to make such a turnaround against the rays
possible. But as the angels are better I need not worry. Sometimes
teams just seem to have an edge over a rival that just doesn't seem
possible. The rays swept the cubs. The angels could sweep the rays.
In sport it would make perfect sense for the cubs to then sweep the
angels.

5. I can't put an exact time on it. I've been a regular visitor to
the states for at least four years and I only watch baseball when the
cubs are on, is it WGN Superstation of Chicago? I get that where I
stay in Ohio. What I know is my interest in baseball goes back to the
early-mid 90's. My interest in the cubs started as a result of
nothing what-so-ever to do with baseball. It was a shot of Wrigley
Field early in the film Sleepless In Seattle and I wondered where I
had heard of it before. After some research my heart was won.