The Hunt for a Red October [Wait Until Next Year!]

[Minty Fresh]

I just don't want to deal with the off season crap talking. We need to go on a tear, and the Braves need to collapse.

It won't matter in Atlanta.  They'll be watching Georgia Tech football in two weeks anyway and the Braves will cease to matter.

[Copecwby20]

Like we all know, I'm a baseball neophyte but I have a question. Let's say the Braves win the NL East, but the Nats make it to the WC game and advance, and then go on to win the NLDS against the Braves... Do the Nats then  have Rightful claim over the NL East title for 2013 season or would it be a lot of NL East doesn't mean crap when you drop the NLDS to a division opponent?

[wpa2629]

Like we all know, I'm a baseball neophyte but I have a question. Let's say the Braves win the NL East, but the Nats make it to the WC game and advance, and then go on to win the NLDS against the Braves... Do the Nats then  have Rightful claim over the NL East title for 2013 season or would it be a lot of NL East doesn't mean crap when you drop the NLDS to a division opponent?

in that scenario the Braves are the NL East Regular season champ regardless

[mimontero88]

Like we all know, I'm a baseball neophyte but I have a question. Let's say the Braves win the NL East, but the Nats make it to the WC game and advance, and then go on to win the NLDS against the Braves... Do the Nats then  have Rightful claim over the NL East title for 2013 season or would it be a lot of NL East doesn't mean crap when you drop the NLDS to a division opponent?

In that scenario the Barves would be the division champs and, at the same time, would have no bragging rights at all.  It would drive them crazy.  In fact, this might be my favorite possible scenario.  I'll take losing the division to them to have them all know their division win was not only meaningless but easily refuted as an accomplishment by us saying, "Yeah but when it counted, we won."

[HalfSmokes]

Since the 12-2 start the Braves have been a 500 club for over 90 games. That's who they are a 500 club - with a history of spectacular gagging down the stretch. Not something you can count on, but certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

The Nats have been a 500 club all year, the only question is can the Nats be better than a 500 club down the stretch

if we're removing hot starts, why not back out the national's 7-2 start?

[mimontero88]

if we're removing hot starts, why not back out the national's 7-2 start?

Hey!!!!  Take your fascist logic out of here!!!

[wpa2629]

if we're removing hot starts, why not back out the national's 7-2 start?

I'm not removing them - simply putting them in perspective

Note I said the Nats were a 500 club ALL year

[HalfSmokes]

I'm not removing them - simply putting them in perspective

Note I said the Nats were a 500 club ALL year

you also said the braves are a .500 club based on removing a hot start, but that logic, back out those two series sweeps against miami and chicago by then nats and they're 7 games under

[mimontero88]

you also said the braves are a .500 club based on removing a hot start, but that logic, back out those two series sweeps against miami and chicago by then nats and they're 7 games under

I think he's also operating under the assumption that the Braves are what they have been but the Nats have vastly underperformed what they should be, which I think is a fair assumption.

[sph274]

if we're removing hot starts, why not back out the national's 7-2 start?

because removing the braves hot start makes it easier to say that they are total garbage, even though they are leading the division by 8.5 games heading into August. The Nats haven't even been a .500 team this year yet the braves are "horrible" caue, I mean, after they went on the hot streak they totally sucked! the dodgers suck if you ignore this recent hot streak!! the braves have also been a .521 team since that start. If you remove the nats "hot start", they are a .464 team. the Cubs are a .466 team as are the Angels.

[wpa2629]

you also said the braves are a .500 club based on removing a hot start, but that logic, back out those two series sweeps against miami and chicago by then nats and they're 7 games under

What are you talking about ? 

I'm talking about 90+ game sample size for the Braves and 105 game sample size for the Nats - not an isolated series here and there

[mimontero88]

because removing the braves hot start makes it easier to say that they are total garbage, even though they are leading the division by 8.5 games heading into August. The Nats haven't even been a .500 team this year yet the braves are "horrible" caue, I mean, after they went on the hot streak they totally sucked! the dodgers suck if you ignore this recent hot streak!! the braves have also been a .521 team since that start. If you remove the nats "hot start", they are a .464 team.

Well since we're discussing scenarios where the Nats make the playoffs you basically have to make the assumption that the Braves aren't very good outside of a hot start and that the Nats are much better than their record would indicate.  In the context of this discussion, I don't think your opinion on whether that is true or not really matters.  It is the only assumption that is workable in a scenario where the Nats win the division.

[HalfSmokes]

What are you talking about ? 

I'm talking about 90+ game sample size for the Braves and 105 game sample size for the Nats - not an isolated series here and there

you're talking about removing a hot start for one team, but ignoring a 7-2 start for another team

[wpa2629]

because removing the braves hot start makes it easier to say that they are total garbage, even though they are leading the division by 8.5 games heading into August. The Nats haven't even been a .500 team this year yet the braves are "horrible" caue, I mean, after they went on the hot streak they totally sucked! the dodgers suck if you ignore this recent hot streak!! the braves have also been a .521 team since that start. If you remove the nats "hot start", they are a .464 team.

LOL hyperbole much. Who said they are garbage?

They have played like a 500 team for 5 months that makes them much more mediocre than awesome. And on what planet is 7-2 a hot start? The Nats have been a 500 team (at best) all year.

Don't know why this is such an unreasonable point of view. You act like the Braves are some awesome juggernaut when the last 90+ games would suggest they have merely been mediocre.

[wpa2629]

you're talking about removing a hot start for one team, but ignoring a 7-2 start for another team

7-2 is not a hot start

[HalfSmokes]

7-2 is not a hot start

but 12-2 is?

[Minty Fresh]

I'm not removing them - simply putting them in perspective

Note I said the Nats were a 500 club ALL year

Yes but we needed a 3-game win streak to get back to 2 games under .500.

[wpa2629]

but 12-2 is?

I have no idea what point you're trying to make

My point is - The Braves last 90 games would suggest they are a 500 team, therefore, catching them would be easier than if they were playing "lights" out the last several weeks like the Dodgers have been.

Capish?

[sph274]

I wouldnt say that they are an unstoppable juggernaut. They arent going anywhere in the playoffs. The Nats arent going anywhere close to the playoffs.

[Minty Fresh]

I have no idea what point you're trying to make

My point is - The Braves last 90 games would suggest they are a 500 team, therefore, catching them would be easier than if they were playing "lights" out the last several weeks like the Dodgers have been.

Capish?

No.  But I "capice" your point. 

[wpa2629]

Yes but we needed a 3-game win streak to get back to 2 games under .500.

Yes, but we've been mostly at 500 or better pretty much all year - it's just the week after the all star game we dipped more than 1 or 2 games below

[wpa2629]

No.  But I "capice" your point. 

LOL I was trying to figure out how to spell that

[mimontero88]

Yes but we needed a 3-game win streak to get back to 2 games under .500.

That's pretty irrelevant.  Baseball is a streaky season filled with winning streaks and losing streaks.  When looking at the full season the fact that we happened to win our last three games is selective sampling when a much larger sample size is available.  In other words, it's statistical heresy.

[wpa2629]

I wouldnt say that they are an unstoppable juggernaut. They arent going anywhere in the playoffs. The Nats arent going anywhere close to the playoffs.

So says you

Teams fall in and out of playoff races ALL the time. The Braves have a history of choking late and the Nats have had a history of hot streaks - maybe both happen. Maybe not

We'll find out soon enough

[sph274]

That's pretty irrelevant.  Baseball is a streaky season filled with winning streaks and losing streaks.  When looking at the full season the fact that we happened to win our last three games is selective sampling when a much larger sample size is available.  In other words, it's statistical heresy.

as is removing the first 15 games of the season. Saying the Braves are a .500 team by pulling the streak where they have played well is statistical heresy.