The only real strong case in that list is the Nationals. When the Marlins start playing more games against the Phillies, Mets, Cubs, and Diamondbacks, we'll know once and for all.

 

I'm just going to hold out judgment until then.

How is that the only strong case? If they hadn't seen us, both the Pirates and the Brewers would be .500+ teams.

Only a couple of games difference isn't significant enough to make a team "weak." When I see the Brewers as 18-19 instead of 19-18 I don't think much of it. There is no reason to. It's still only the beginning of May. We haven't even played the one of the second place teams in our division yet.

 

You can't make a logical case this early in the season since there are so few games played. As far as talented teams go (sans record) the Marlins haven't really faced strong competition. And in many of the instances where they have, they've buckled.

 

Like I say, if they do well on that long road trip and beat the Mets and Phillies (the best teams in the NL East) and teams they've traditionally struggled with, I'll listen. I don't think I'm being harsh, either. A good team wins the majority of those games.

 

And for the record I'm not saying that the Marlins aren't a good team. I'm merely saying that we haven't played our major competition in the division much and it's too early to tell. People here are talking about trading prospects to add rental starting pitching. That's extremely premature. I know I'm sounding like a pessimist but let me remind you that even after the Cabrera/Willis trade I was one of those people vehemently predicting that the Marlins would still be a better team than in 2007.

The only real strong case in that list is the Nationals. When the Marlins start playing more games against the Phillies, Mets, Cubs, and Diamondbacks, we'll know once and for all.

 

I'm just going to hold out judgment until then.

How is that the only strong case? If they hadn't seen us, both the Pirates and the Brewers would be .500+ teams.

Only a couple of games difference isn't significant enough to make a team "weak." When I see the Brewers as 18-19 instead of 19-18 I don't think much of it. There is no reason to. It's still only the beginning of May. We haven't even played the one of the second place teams in our division yet.

 

You can't make a logical case this early in the season since there are so few games played. As far as talented teams go (sans record) the Marlins haven't really faced strong competition. And in many of the instances where they have, they've buckled.

 

Like I say, if they do well on that long road trip and beat the Mets and Phillies (the best teams in the NL East) and teams they've traditionally struggled with, I'll listen. I don't think I'm being harsh, either. A good team wins the majority of those games.

 

And for the record I'm not saying that the Marlins aren't a good team. I'm merely saying that we haven't played our major competition in the division much and it's too early to tell. People here are talking about trading prospects to add rental starting pitching. That's extremely premature. I know I'm sounding like a pessimist but let me remind you that even after the Cabrera/Willis trade I was one of those people vehemently predicting that the Marlins would still be a better team than in 2007.

 

There's nothing wrong with what you are saying. I couldn't agree more. But this is a young team, and any win over a "weak" team or "strong" team doesn't matter. A win builds confidence, and confidence is the foundation of greatness. Keep in mind that there was a point when people saw our team as a weak team. I look at it how Uggla does when he said "These games in April and May are just as big as the ones in August and September, especially if you're winning them". So instead of focusing on the strength of our opponents, let's focus on the strength in winning.

I've touched on this in another thread and I hesitate to use examples from other sports but Bill Parcells, no stranger to winning, always said, the keys to success are :

1-winning the games you are supposed to win,i.e, beat the "bad teams", 2- win at home, use that home field advantage (not sure if that applies with regards to fan support but our park being a pitchers can neutralize some power hitting teams.) We're 12-9 at home. 3- win in your division. We're 12-5 in th east.

 

So again let them say what they want. This team as far as I can see is doing what they are supposed to do. Leyland used to say it s important to win series. That's what the Fish are doing. How many series have they lost so far? Three? That's pretty good.

We don't beat weak teams, we make teams weak.

Rab, this is a great slogan, you deserve some of that 8 figure marketing budget.

If the Marlins are beating up "weak" teams, what does that make them? It makes them better than weak teams, which makes them ............a good team? To be a good team, you should dominate a "weak" team, unlike the other NL East teams who haven't dominated these "Weak" teams.

There is no such argument of a weak schedule in baseball. Most every team in every season finishes with a winning percentage no higher than .600% and no lower than .400%. Teams are relatively even. I agree sometimes you catch teams at the right time, when they are struggling, but strength of schedule is not something that should be factored into baseball.

You can only play who you are scheduled against. Maybe the teams the marlins have played so far are "weak", but the reality is the marlins have the best record in the league. Right they now they are beating the teams they are supposed too.

 

However, I cant wait to see them get their hands on the phillies and mets...

If the Marlins produce a .500 record from May 26th to June 5th, I'll believe.

 

I would extend that to May 20th, thats when they play Arizona, the team with the second best record in the NL.

Bottom line is this..... we have NOT beat any good teams yet. Well, I guess you could call the Braves a "good team". I am extremely happy with our record right now and I am super psyched about this season. But I am still not ready to call us a playoff team. I want to see how we play against the Mets, Phils, Cubs, Cards, Dbacks, Rays..... We have plenty of games left against all these teams. Time will tell.

The answer is yes, We are still waiting to find a stronger team. There just hasn't been any as of yet. If we find any we will let you know

You can only play who you are scheduled against.

Precisely. They've taken advantage of the scheduling, like any good team would do. Are they as good as their record indicates? Probably not. But we'll be able to find out by the end of the month.

 

The easy schedule thus far also means that there must be a brutal section of the sked down the road....that will really test this team's mettle.

According to the RPI standings, our strength of schedule is .504. This means our schedule has been slightly more difficult than the league average. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi

 

We have the best record and our competition has been average. At the end of the year most team's SOS hover around .500, plus or minus .10. You can't take anything away from this group. They're playing well.

 

That said, I think it is too early in the season to jump to any conclusions. Furthermore, I don't think the 10 game road trip is a test of any kind, either. They could do poorly simply because they could get into a slump at the time, so it is unfair to write them off if they finish that road trip 4-6 or 3-7. We'll know where this team stands by the middle or end of June, by which point they should be hitting 70-80 games played, a much larger and reliable sample size.

 

One thing history DOES prove: really bad teams tend to be bad after the first and second months of the season. This team is not a really bad team, nor is it a bad team. It may end up slightly below average or better.

Wasnt Milwaukee supposed to be pretty good? And Washington projected better than the Marlins? And the Braves... hello? The only reason that they have such poor records is BECAUSE of us. Subtract our records from those teams and they all get substantially better... WE pulvarized them, and made them look bad.

Keep in mind that every team we've beaten, including the Braves, which are often left out of these discussions here ( in SoFla) and across the country, were picked to be BETTER than the Marlins. Every team had their share of injuries, the Marlins haven't been immune, the playing field is level, but those teams we've left in our wake are now considered "soft" teams because we beat them.

 

The Brewers were considered a favorite in their division, The Nats were supposed to be improved, even the Pirates and the Braves, yet we've come out on top. People, especially people reporting or editorializing about the sport don't want to proved wrong. Too bad.

 

BTW, Gammons is now saying the Marlins can win 87-90 games this season. Good for him. Of course the guys on 790 (you know the Marlins flagship broadcaster think he's "nuts". Goes to show you.

The problem is that all of the national analysts gloss over the less popular teams and make simplistic and superficial projections. Those of us who actually followed the firesale in 2005/2006 knew the team wouldn't be that bad. People like Gammons most likely didn't focus much of their time and attention to the personnel moves and consequently the Marlins were alleged to have some miraculous season.

 

I remember reading an article in the Washington Post just days before opening day that predicted the Marlins to have by far the worst record in baseball. That made me laugh. Gammons certainly knows baseball but he doesn't know the Marlins and he doesn't know the Nationals. They are extremely fickle and make bold statements hoping that they'll be right. When they're wrong they'll just make excuses (if the national public even really cares),

 

Why these national analysts get so much attention on these boards is completely beyond me.

Keep in mind that every team we've beaten, including the Braves, which are often left out of these discussions here ( in SoFla) and across the country, were picked to be BETTER than the Marlins. Every team had their share of injuries, the Marlins haven't been immune, the playing field is level, but those teams we've left in our wake are now considered "soft" teams because we beat them.

 

The Brewers were considered a favorite in their division, The Nats were supposed to be improved, even the Pirates and the Braves, yet we've come out on top. People, especially people reporting or editorializing about the sport don't want to proved wrong. Too bad.

 

BTW, Gammons is now saying the Marlins can win 87-90 games this season. Good for him. Of course the guys on 790 (you know the Marlins flagship broadcaster think he's "nuts". Goes to show you.

Which guys on 790?

Keep in mind that every team we've beaten, including the Braves, which are often left out of these discussions here ( in SoFla) and across the country, were picked to be BETTER than the Marlins. Every team had their share of injuries, the Marlins haven't been immune, the playing field is level, but those teams we've left in our wake are now considered "soft" teams because we beat them.

 

The Brewers were considered a favorite in their division, The Nats were supposed to be improved, even the Pirates and the Braves, yet we've come out on top. People, especially people reporting or editorializing about the sport don't want to proved wrong. Too bad.

 

BTW, Gammons is now saying the Marlins can win 87-90 games this season. Good for him. Of course the guys on 790 (you know the Marlins flagship broadcaster think he's "nuts". Goes to show you.

Which guys on 790?

Lebatard likes to mention very often that we are facing nothing but weak teams and that our starting pitching won't hold up.

Keep in mind that every team we've beaten, including the Braves, which are often left out of these discussions here ( in SoFla) and across the country, were picked to be BETTER than the Marlins. Every team had their share of injuries, the Marlins haven't been immune, the playing field is level, but those teams we've left in our wake are now considered "soft" teams because we beat them.

 

The Brewers were considered a favorite in their division, The Nats were supposed to be improved, even the Pirates and the Braves, yet we've come out on top. People, especially people reporting or editorializing about the sport don't want to proved wrong. Too bad.

 

BTW, Gammons is now saying the Marlins can win 87-90 games this season. Good for him. Of course the guys on 790 (you know the Marlins flagship broadcaster think he's "nuts". Goes to show you.

Which guys on 790?

Lebatard likes to mention very often that we are facing nothing but weak teams and that our starting pitching won't hold up.

Our starting pitching concerns me to.

The fact that there's a topic discussing the Marlins beating up on weak teams brings a smile to my face.