The 2016 Cubs: SPLOOGE SPLOOGE SPLOOGE

[Bort]

Here's a fun thought - what if the Giants continue to crater, and St. Louis winds up with the first wild card?

Why is this a fun thought? Check St. Louis' record at home.

I would rest easier knowing that they didn't even come close. I want the Cubs knocking them out last year to be the last time they see the postseason for about 40 years.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Here's a fun thought - what if the Giants continue to crater, and St. Louis winds up with the first wild card?

Why is this a fun thought? Check St. Louis' record at home.

I would rest easier knowing that they didn't even come close. I want the Cubs knocking them out last year to be the last time they see the postseason for about 40 years.

Speaking of St. Louis, anyone up for a roadtrip for the clincher if it's in St. Louis? 9/13 is a night game and 9/14 is a day game.

[Quality Start Machine]

Here's a fun thought - what if the Giants continue to crater, and St. Louis winds up with the first wild card?

Why is this a fun thought? Check St. Louis' record at home.

I would rest easier knowing that they didn't even come close. I want the Cubs knocking them out last year to be the last time they see the postseason for about 40 years.

Speaking of St. Louis, anyone up for a roadtrip for the clincher if it's in St. Louis? 9/13 is a night game and 9/14 is a day game.

It's not going to take that long.

[Chuck to Chuck]

Here's a fun thought - what if the Giants continue to crater, and St. Louis winds up with the first wild card?

Why is this a fun thought? Check St. Louis' record at home.

I would rest easier knowing that they didn't even come close. I want the Cubs knocking them out last year to be the last time they see the postseason for about 40 years.

Speaking of St. Louis, anyone up for a roadtrip for the clincher if it's in St. Louis? 9/13 is a night game and 9/14 is a day game.

It's not going to take that long.

Only 20 games left (10 for each team) until they play.  8-2 Cubs would take 2-8 from the Cards to clinch before then.  Can't see it.

[Canadouche]

40 games over .500, for the first time in our lifetimes.

[Bort]

40 games over .500, for the first time in our lifetimes.

And I'm guessing this even includes Stew!

[Brownie]

40 games over .500, for the first time in our lifetimes.

And I'm guessing this even includes Stew!

Nope. Finished 1945 98-56.

[Bort]

40 games over .500, for the first time in our lifetimes.

And I'm guessing this even includes Stew!

Nope. Finished 1945 98-56.

Ah. For some reason, I assumed they had a fairly mediocre record that year despite the pennant because every team sucked.

[Brownie]

40 games over .500, for the first time in our lifetimes.

And I'm guessing this even includes Stew!

Nope. Finished 1945 98-56.

Ah. For some reason, I assumed they had a fairly mediocre record that year despite the pennant because every team sucked.

Back in the 80s, there was a computer game called Micro League Baseball that I was a bit obsessed with. It was a predecessor to OOTP and a successor to the old Strat-a-matic games. Anyway, the main disk had 26 teams to sample the game: the 27 Yanks, 55 Dodgers, 61 Yanks, 80 Phillies, 75 Reds, and so on. One of the teams was the 45 Cubs and I was stunned how mediocre they were. In reality, they weren't bad. Andy Pafko had a pedestrian year compared to what he became. Cavarretta had a good year -- extra base power and a .355 average. Smiling Stan Hack was pretty good. After that, it was a bunch of garbage.

Except for their pitching: Hank Borowy and Claude Passeau could hold their own.

Anyway, I found the 1945 Cubs so boring, I filled out the mail order and got the 1984 season disk and the general manager's disk so I could beat the shit out of the 27 Yankees and the 82 Cardinals with Sutcliffe every fucking single day, and then I would load the current Cubs up to date with the general manager's disk. So yeah, I preferred going up against the Big Red Machine with the 1986 Cubs than the team that actually played in the World Series.

[Hoyas]

40 games over .500, for the first time in our lifetimes.

And I'm guessing this even includes Stew!

Nope. Finished 1945 98-56.

Ah. For some reason, I assumed they had a fairly mediocre record that year despite the pennant because every team sucked.

Back in the 80s, there was a computer game called Micro League Baseball that I was a bit obsessed with. It was a predecessor to OOTP and a successor to the old Strat-a-matic games. Anyway, the main disk had 26 teams to sample the game: the 27 Yanks, 55 Dodgers, 61 Yanks, 80 Phillies, 75 Reds, and so on. One of the teams was the 45 Cubs and I was stunned how mediocre they were. In reality, they weren't bad. Andy Pafko had a pedestrian year compared to what he became. Cavarretta had a good year -- extra base power and a .355 average. Smiling Stan Hack was pretty good. After that, it was a bunch of garbage.

Except for their pitching: Hank Borowy and Claude Passeau could hold their own.

Anyway, I found the 1945 Cubs so boring, I filled out the mail order and got the 1984 season disk and the general manager's disk so I could beat the shit out of the 27 Yankees and the 82 Cardinals with Sutcliffe every fucking single day, and then I would load the current Cubs up to date with the general manager's disk. So yeah, I preferred going up against the Big Red Machine with the 1986 Cubs than the team that actually played in the World Series.

You just described the vast majority of my 1985-1988 except for the part where I dutifully recorded the play by play, full box score, and season stats in a very large stack of notebooks. I miss those days.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

40 games over .500, for the first time in our lifetimes.

And I'm guessing this even includes Stew!

Nope. Finished 1945 98-56.

Ah. For some reason, I assumed they had a fairly mediocre record that year despite the pennant because every team sucked.

Thanks for reading.

Jerk.

[Saul Goodman]

Yeesh.

[Bort]

40 games over .500, for the first time in our lifetimes.

And I'm guessing this even includes Stew!

Nope. Finished 1945 98-56.

Ah. For some reason, I assumed they had a fairly mediocre record that year despite the pennant because every team sucked.

Thanks for reading.

Jerk.

I cannot imagine a world where I see a row of numbers like that and do more than skim.

[Canadouche]

40 games over .500, for only the second time in our lifetimes.

[Tonker]

As good as these Cubs are, they could be even better: their 691-462 (+229!) run differential should, all things being equal, be good for a record of 93-44 (.679).  That would put them on pace for 110 wins.  For fuck sake.

While we're on my favourite subject, by the way, I was having a look around the AL (oh, no reason) and it looks like the Red Sox (752-610) and not the Rangers (669-646) might be the cream of the crop.  The Rangers are a full 11 (eleven) games ahead of their run differential, whereas Boston are 5 games behind and missing out on the playoffs is a real possibility.  Which would be a shame, eh?