July 20, 201115 yr BTW, the Reds are hitting .184 with bases loaded this year and 0-8 since the AS break.
July 20, 201115 yr At the end of the day a bump for 2 or 3 series won't make much of a difference. To greatly increase their ability to spend they have to increase overall attendance. It's been more than 2 or 3. It's been very good for a while now.
July 20, 201115 yr It's been more than 2 or 3. It's been very good for a while now. Like the 24,000 that they drew to watch them play their biggest rivals on Sunday? They got a bump from the Yankees, Indians, Cardinals and Brewers. Overall, they have not increased attendance enough to take on significant payroll. Let them get swept tomorrow and school get started back in 2 weeks and see how many show up to watch the Padres, Rockies and Nationals in a couple of weeks. Cincinnati is no longer a great baseball town.
July 20, 201115 yr It's July 19 ... things can change in a hurry. Remember last year when the Cardinals swept the Reds, and everyone thought the Cardinals were in control? Then things fell apart.
July 20, 201115 yr Like the 24,000 that they drew to watch them play their biggest rivals on Sunday? They got a bump from the Yankees, Indians, Cardinals and Brewers. Overall, they have not increased attendance enough to take on significant payroll. Let them get swept tomorrow and school get started back in 2 weeks and see how many show up to watch the Padres, Rockies and Nationals in a couple of weeks. Cincinnati is no longer a great baseball town. Are we skipping Friday and Saturday's numbers? Check out the Toronto numbers. What you're saying about after a sweep is my point. Give me any small market team as bad as the Reds were for as long as they were that sell out. The talk of great baseball towns is useless to me. Let them win the division this year and next and I guarantee you the attendance the year after that is better.
July 20, 201115 yr I said it before the season when everyone was all high on this team. I said it reminded me a lot of the 2006 Bengals team. A team who suprised people the year before by winning the division, and the future looked bright with the young talent. Then the next year they start off alright, and get talked about having the best rivalry in baseball against the Cardinals, just like in 2006 when a Sports Illustrated had the Bengals and Steelers on the cover for being the NFL's new nastiest rivalry. So many similar things about these two teams. Which if they continue on that path, they will make a run at the end of the year to put theirselves in position to win the division but will find a way to blow it. Hopefully they can at least change that outcome.
July 20, 201115 yr Like the 24,000 that they drew to watch them play their biggest rivals on Sunday? They got a bump from the Yankees, Indians, Cardinals and Brewers. Overall, they have not increased attendance enough to take on significant payroll. Let them get swept tomorrow and school get started back in 2 weeks and see how many show up to watch the Padres, Rockies and Nationals in a couple of weeks. Cincinnati is no longer a great baseball town. Cincinnati is still a great baseball town. On the attendance side, they don't draw people from the tri-state region and W. Va. like they did years ago and the corporate season tickets are not there like they used to be. But this city knows and loves its baseball.
July 20, 201115 yr It's July 19 ... things can change in a hurry. Remember last year when the Cardinals swept the Reds, and everyone thought the Cardinals were in control? Then things fell apart. Here's a very sobering thought for the "it's still early" crowd. The Reds now have 65 games left. Let's just say that because of the general awfulness of the NL Central that 85 wins takes the division. That means that the Reds have to go 38-27 the rest of the way to get there. Doesn't seem so bad, right? That means that the Reds have to win at a .585 clip the rest of the way--that is a higher winning percentage than everyone in baseball besides the Phillies, Red Sox, Yankees and Braves. Since the Reds have not managed to win even back to back games in over a month that is a daunting task. If the NL Central winner reaches 90 wins then the Reds would have to go 43-22 or a .661 winning percentage. Neither situation is impossible, but I'd put their postseason chances at 15-20%.
July 20, 201115 yr Here's a very sobering thought for the "it's still early" crowd. The Reds now have 65 games left. Let's just say that because of the general awfulness of the NL Central that 85 wins takes the division. That means that the Reds have to go 38-27 the rest of the way to get there. Doesn't seem so bad, right? That means that the Reds have to win at a .585 clip the rest of the way--that is a higher winning percentage than everyone in baseball besides the Phillies, Red Sox, Yankees and Braves. Since the Reds have not managed to win even back to back games in over a month that is a daunting task. If the NL Central winner reaches 90 wins then the Reds would have to go 43-22 or a .661 winning percentage. Neither situation is impossible, but I'd put their postseason chances at 15-20%. Agreed. The problem is the manager, general manager and players are the leaders of that club and I don't think they ever thought it wouldn't click. Now it's probably too late even if it clicks.
July 20, 201115 yr Here's a very sobering thought for the "it's still early" crowd. The Reds now have 65 games left. Let's just say that because of the general awfulness of the NL Central that 85 wins takes the division. That means that the Reds have to go 38-27 the rest of the way to get there. Doesn't seem so bad, right? That means that the Reds have to win at a .585 clip the rest of the way--that is a higher winning percentage than everyone in baseball besides the Phillies, Red Sox, Yankees and Braves. Since the Reds have not managed to win even back to back games in over a month that is a daunting task. If the NL Central winner reaches 90 wins then the Reds would have to go 43-22 or a .661 winning percentage. Neither situation is impossible, but I'd put their postseason chances at 15-20%. Numbers like that can change so quickly, it is hard to get too uptight about them. If the Reds win 6 in a row, then they only have to go 5 over .500 the rest of the way to get to 85 wins. I agree that time is getting short, but the fact is if they had won the last two nights, they would be playing for first place tomorrow.
July 20, 201115 yr Numbers like that can change so quickly, it is hard to get too uptight about them. If the Reds win 6 in a row, then they only have to go 5 over .500 the rest of the way to get to 85 wins. I agree that time is getting short, but the fact is if they had won the last two nights, they would be playing for first place tomorrow. That's just it, they didn't win either of the last 2 nights and they now have to leap 3 teams for first place. What indication has this team given that they are capable of winning 6 in a row? Particularly with the team with the 2nd best record in the NL coming to town.
July 20, 201115 yr That's just it, they didn't win either of the last 2 nights and they now have to leap 3 teams for first place. What indication has this team given that they are capable of winning 6 in a row? Particularly with the team with the 2nd best record in the NL coming to town. Oh, I am not going to disagree with you or anyone else on that side of it. It is frustrating to watch at bats by almost everyone on this team. They have swung right through so many hittable pitches over the past couple of weeks that it is hard to watch. Even Votto looked bad in his last at bat tonight. I am just saying playing with numbers like you were above isn't really relevant unless you host a radio talk show and want to stir people up.
July 20, 201115 yr Oh, I am not going to disagree with you or anyone else on that side of it. It is frustrating to watch at bats by almost everyone on this team. They have swung right through so many hittable pitches over the past couple of weeks that it is hard to watch. Even Votto looked bad in his last at bat tonight. I am just saying playing with numbers like you were above isn't really relevant unless you host a radio talk show and want to stir people up. Why is it not relevant? Those numbers are facts, not opinions. To get to 85 wins they have to win at a higher percentage than all but 4 teams in MLB have managed to do this season. And for 85 wins to win the division the 3 teams ahead of them would all have to play pretty much .500. Those are the bleak facts that they are facing.
July 20, 201115 yr Numbers like that can change so quickly, it is hard to get too uptight about them. If the Reds win 6 in a row, then they only have to go 5 over .500 the rest of the way to get to 85 wins. I agree that time is getting short, but the fact is if they had won the last two nights, they would be playing for first place tomorrow. Something about candy and nuts and Christmas. There is no reason to think this team can go 5 over .500 the rest of the way. Even if they did I doubt 85 gets you anything. All it will take is one of the top 3 teams to rattle off 8-10 in a row, and it's over. And even if that doesn't happen the Reds aren't good enought to leap frog the 3 teams.
July 20, 201115 yr I would have never guessed in March that the Indians and Pirates would be the two teams to destroy them so bad that it ruined their season.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.