Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Cubs are winners at losing


Jangler

Recommended Posts

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/11/the-cubs-have-joined-the-10000-loss-club/
 

With Sunday’s 5-2 victory, the Braves wrapped up a series sweep over the Cubs. The Cubs fell to 12-24, 10.5 games out of first place, dead last in the NL Central. But the embarrassment didn’t end there.

Sunday’s loss marked the 10,000th in club history for the Cubs, joining only the Phillies (10,480) and Braves (10,176) in the five-figure gang. The Cubs got there a bit sooner than they would have liked, having won games at a meager .417 clip since the start of the 2010 season.

 

 

 

480 more and the Cubs will be the goat.

 

 

 

too soon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Soler has looked awesome so far in his 5 AB's.

Homered in his first big league at bat last night. RBI single later in the game as well.

Just ripped a leadoff double to right over schumaker's head. But the cubs stranded him of course.

The Marlins have put together a nice season this year, the cubs could soon be on there way. Addison Russell has been mashing in the minors since the trade as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Even limited as he was I still don't think they have replaced his production, and not just the sack stats. The games Clowney missed it was very obvious what his value still was. Risky move but whatever. They only had 32 sacks last year and if that drops then it's going to get ugly. I see the improvement in run stopping but not in pass protect in any way.  
    • I have zero issues with this.  
    • Sorta related.  I just looked up a stat:  Success rates for NFL draft's second rounders.  I was surprised that it is 49%.  The success rate for first rounders is 58%.   Here success does not mean those that did not bust, it means that roughly half of the players selected in the second round become full-time starters at some point in their careers.  Busts do that too.  However, considering the fact that a first round talent is worth up to 1800 points (first overall pick) more than the first pick of the second round and as low as 350 points (last pick in first round) higher than the last pick in round 2, it seems there could be cases in which it would be to your advantage to trade out of round 1 and draft two or three second rounders for the value.  Of course, the elite players are likely to be gone, and some positions overwhelmingly suck after round 1 (traditionally, like QB or LT, for example), but if you need to find starters at positions like DT, G, LB, S, C, TE, RB, etc, there could be a time when you trade back for more starters.  I was surprised that the margin between rounds 1 and 2 was only 9%.    While I realize that some of you sofa scholars are thinking, "Well duh?  Trading back gives you more players." as you wipe the Cheetos off your shirt.  Not the point.  The point is you have to consider the draft,the needs (and the number of them), and you need to scout the second and third rounds like you do the first, the cap, and the long-term impact.  If you can find 2 players with a 49% chance of becoming a starter, are you better off than drafting one player who has a 58% chance in the long term? So if I traded away my first rounder for two second rounders (a trade most teams would make) regularly, when I got 10 second rounders (by trading 5 first rounders), 5 would be starters.  If I did not trade and kept my 5 first rounders, 3 would be starters.  Furthermore, their rookie contracts would be much cheaper than the 5 first rounders. 
×
×
  • Create New...