Cubs or Padres? Why?

[Outlander]

Doesn't matter, the Brewers are the danger.

[Brian]

On 9/28/2026 at 6:11 AM, adambr2 said:

“Please not the Cubs because it would be so awful to be eliminated by them” is the baseball equivalent of “I’m never going to ask her out because what if she turns me down?”

SD pitching is 3X better than the Cubs pitching.  Your stuck in reverse thinking and flipping it upside down IMHO. 

[adambr2]

18 minutes ago, Brian said:

SD pitching is 3X better than the Cubs pitching.  Your stuck in reverse thinking and flipping it upside down IMHO. 

I agree, I’d much rather face the Cubs. I am not sure what part of my quoted statement gave a different impression than that. 

[Brian]

2 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I agree, I’d much rather face the Cubs. I am not sure what part of my quoted statement gave a different impression than that. 

Maybe your saying, “Please not the Cubs because it would be so awful to be eliminated by them.” 🤪 

[adambr2]

1 minute ago, Brian said:

Maybe your saying, “Please not the Cubs because it would be so awful to be eliminated by them.” 🤪 

I think you may want to go back and re-read it. 

[MrTPlush]

 

Padres have a losing record on the road and were a 71-win pace team against teams >.500. A lot of overrating of the Padres and underrating the Cubs going on.

If we end up losing to the Padres, a hypothetical series against the Cubs likely wouldn’t have been much better. We are going to have to really disappoint to lose to either team.

[Brian]

20 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I think you may want to go back and re-read it. 

Oh OK, it was to be a funny post. 

[adambr2]

5 minutes ago, Brian said:

Oh OK, it was to be a funny post. 

[formerlybis]

I really wish there was more pomp and circumstance about finishing with the best record after 162 games. I’ve pointed out before that the English Premier League gives the trophy to the regular season winner (there is no playoffs). To me, over 162, you’ve really proven you’re the best team, period. Having 3 bad games out of 5 (0.03 of the regular season) against another competent team really shouldn’t negate the whole season. But that’s how American sports works.

oh, I don’t care about Dads or baby bears….

[OldSchoolSnapper]

The Cubs are the worst team in the NL field. Just a bad pitching staff and generally not playing well at the end. Manager seems weak and feeble, lots of questionable quotes the last month of the season. They just don't strike me as a 'tough' team. 

I don't really wish for one opponent over another though; it'll be a ball of anxiety regardless of who it is.

[BruisedCrew]

21 minutes ago, formerlybis said:

I really wish there was more pomp and circumstance about finishing with the best record after 162 games. I’ve pointed out before that the English Premier League gives the trophy to the regular season winner (there is no playoffs). To me, over 162, you’ve really proven you’re the best team, period. Having 3 bad games out of 5 (0.03 of the regular season) against another competent team really shouldn’t negate the whole season. But that’s how American sports works.

oh, I don’t care about Dads or baby bears….

I think the English Premier league plays a full home and home round robin season so there is no question about differing schedules.

But it is a fact that the lust for more playoffs and more money generated from the playoffs and more teams having a shot at getting into them,  has taken precedence over identifying the “best”, or at least most deserving team. When I was growing up, you had the National League champion and American League champion, determined by their regular season records, and they squared off in the World Series. There was a significantly greater chance that a team with the best regular season record overall would emerge as champion.

These days, most teams that win 100 games or more don’t advance past the division round.

[adambr2]

11 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

The Cubs are the worst team in the NL field. Just a bad pitching staff and generally not playing well at the end. Manager seems weak and feeble, lots of questionable quotes the last month of the season. They just don't strike me as a 'tough' team. 

I don't really wish for one opponent over another though; it'll be a ball of anxiety regardless of who it is.

They’re kind of baseball’s Packers. Maybe they sneak in, but they don’t scare anybody. 

And if you surveyed 100 baseball and football fans and asked “which MLB manager most closely compares to Matt LaFleur”, the number 1 answer in the survey would definitely be “Craig Counsell.”

[OldSchoolSnapper]

8 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

They’re kind of baseball’s Packers. Maybe they sneak in, but they don’t scare anybody. 

And if you surveyed 100 baseball and football fans and asked “which MLB manager most closely compares to Matt LaFleur”, the number 1 answer in the survey would definitely be “Craig Counsell.”

I nearly typed that when I wrote that comment.

[homer]

2 hours ago, Outlander said:

Doesn't matter, the Brewers are the danger.

[igor67]

All the teams are good on the NL side, so no preference here. It's not hard to imagine how each team wins a series. We've showed up the Cubs plenty, so there is no special dread for me. our offense can go cold enough and any of the teams can luck into just enough HRs or even a flukey defensive miscue and take the series against our pitchers.

[SeaBass]

If forced to choose I'd rather lose to the Padres than the Cubs but yeah, there's no question that the Cubs would be the easier matchup. So let's just beat whichever team we get.

The caveat that comes with the Padres defeating the Brewers in the NLDS is that they're an easy team to root for after that. Albeit with some reservation when it comes to Machado being on that team but it's the SD fans that deserve a championship.

There's really no other team in the NL field I'd want to root for other than SD.

[hawing]

15 hours ago, Opening Day said:

 It is what it is, no easy opponents in October, or hopefully November.

If there are November games for anyone this year, it's because of a WS postponement because there weren't enough games played in Milwaukee. 😉

But otherwise, yep, everyone at this point is either good, hot, or both.  Every game vs CHC multiplies our emotions (definitely mine; I guess I can't speak for all of you), so not having to see their fanbase until 2027/after the lockout always sounds good.  However, their flaws are fresh in my mind and they seem more beatable.  

[bm1090]

6 hours ago, adambr2 said:

They’re kind of baseball’s Packers. Maybe they sneak in, but they don’t scare anybody. 

And if you surveyed 100 baseball and football fans and asked “which MLB manager most closely compares to Matt LaFleur”, the number 1 answer in the survey would definitely be “Craig Counsell.”

I was thinking about the Brewers playoff performances since 2018 the other day, and I completely agree. I think there's something with Craig's personality that tightens up the team. I know we lost to the Mets in Murph's first year, but you could just sense the team was so much looser. Part of that is youth, but I think a lot of it is Murphy vs. Counsell.

 

[kestrel79]

26 minutes ago, bm1090 said:

I was thinking about the Brewers playoff performances since 2018 the other day, and I completely agree. I think there's something with Craig's personality that tightens up the team. I know we lost to the Mets in Murph's first year, but you could just sense the team was so much looser. Part of that is youth, but I think a lot of it is Murphy vs. Counsell.

 

I think also part of it was having teams with players such as Brewers legend Ryon Healy batting cleanup. The 2018 team seemed very loose. But I would agree with that for some of the later Craigers era Brewers teams yes.

[bm1090]

6 minutes ago, kestrel79 said:

I think also part of it was having teams with players such as Brewers legend Ryon Healy batting cleanup. The 2018 team seemed very loose. But I would agree with that for some of the later Craigers era Brewers teams yes.

To be fair, I was not considering 2020. That team had no shot.

2021 and 2023, though…..

[Underachiever]

12 hours ago, adambr2 said:

Six innings definitely don’t, but if momentum and “getting hot” mean anything, 20 out of 23 definitely might. 

87 Brewers started the season winning 20 out of 23, then lost 12 in a row, so...something something or other.

[BruisedCrew]

13 hours ago, adambr2 said:

Six innings definitely don’t, but if momentum and “getting hot” mean anything, 20 out of 23 definitely might. 

 

I’m not sure how much you’ve learn about a team when they win 12 out of 13 in September against teams that are counting the days until the end of the season (Nats, Giants, Rockies, Marlins.)

[Just Some Guy]

9 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

I’m not sure how much you’ve learn about a team when they win 12 out of 13 in September against teams that are counting the days until the end of the season (Nats, Giants, Rockies, Marlins.)

Well maybe so, but they've also won series against the Dodgers, Yankees and DBacks in September.  Plus, they looked really good last night -- granted, a single game is never enough to draw conclusions on, but still.

I realize some folks on this thread believe SD's overrated, but I'm not one of them.

[Cool Hand Lucroy]

10 hours ago, BruisedCrew said:

I think the English Premier league plays a full home and home round robin season so there is no question about differing schedules.

But it is a fact that the lust for more playoffs and more money generated from the playoffs and more teams having a shot at getting into them,  has taken precedence over identifying the “best”, or at least most deserving team. When I was growing up, you had the National League champion and American League champion, determined by their regular season records, and they squared off in the World Series. There was a significantly greater chance that a team with the best regular season record overall would emerge as champion.

These days, most teams that win 100 games or more don’t advance past the division round.

I feel like the Brewers winning the Central and finishing with the best record in baseball is at least comparable to winning the Carabao Cup (basically like a much bigger, more relevant version of the NIT). If, I don't know, Bournemouth won that, they'd be massively thrilled. And you could argue that this run of success is like winning the Europa League or definitely the Conference League (or the FA Cup--which is basically the NCAA Tournament), which, again, would be celebrated and remembered for eternity.

US fans don't think that way, but it's mostly because of cultural arbitrariness. There's no reason we can't individually think of it in those terms, even if it will never get the same level of public acclaim.

[Opening Day]

13 hours ago, formerlybis said:

I really wish there was more pomp and circumstance about finishing with the best record after 162 games. I’ve pointed out before that the English Premier League gives the trophy to the regular season winner (there is no playoffs). To me, over 162, you’ve really proven you’re the best team, period. Having 3 bad games out of 5 (0.03 of the regular season) against another competent team really shouldn’t negate the whole season. But that’s how American sports works.

oh, I don’t care about Dads or baby bears….

I dont support a regular season trophy.  But I agree about the 5 game series.  In fact, if it were up to me, they would go doqn to a 5 team playoff.   And to make up the games lost from the eliminate 2nc WC series (revenue), the WC (4 vs 5 only) would be 5 games, and the CS and DS would both be 7 games.