Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is WRONG with the 1 game playoff setup in relation to all post season series

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BiZmaRK
    replied
    Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
    First I think there IS a problem with wild card teams (when there was 1) not worried about trying for the division title and coasting into the playoffs where there was really very little difference between making the playoffs as a division champion or making it as a wild card.

    But...

    1) the teams are allowed to submit a 1 game playoff roster, which means they can load up on relief pitchers and bench players and not worry about starting pitchers - the obvious solution would be to submit a playoff roster to make it through at least the wild card game AND 1 round
    Did the wild card teams do this?

    2) then the next series, I do not like that the best teams with the best records are forced to open the series on the road - I don't care if it is 2-3 setup and supposedly willget the home field advantage but only if the series goes at least 5 games (the maximum), they should open at home and go 2-2-1 or whatever
    2-2-1 worked fine for a long time. No need to change it. But let's see how it works long term. 3 out of 4 lower seeds won.

    3) related, how insane is it the #1 seed in both leagues will not know until very late on Friday which city they have to travel to to start the best of 5 series - giving them a day or a day and a quarter at most to travel and/or make travel plans - again a huge penalty for a team with the supposed #1 seed

    fix one problem (wild card teams with no incentive to get division) and create 3 (or more) new ones
    Why not turn the wild card game into a regular season game, as it was if two teams were tied and the tiebreaker game was needed?

    Leave a comment:


  • seezero
    replied
    How about the two wildcard teams play 2 games in 2 days in the following manner:

    In the first game, the two teams play 9 innings without the possibility of extra innings.

    In the second game, the two teams play 9 innings without extra innings also.

    If one team either has two wins, or one win and one tie then that team moves on to the LDS while the other team goes home.

    Otherwise the two teams play extra innings with the score reset to 0 to 0 immediately after the second game, and the winner of those extra innings goes to the LDS.

    Example:

    Rays play the Blue Jays in Toronto in both games since the Blue Jays have the better record.

    The Blue Jays win the first game 1 to 0 in 9 innings.

    The Rays win the second game 7 to 5 in 9 innings.

    Both teams have one win each and have to play extra innings with the score reset to 0 to 0 immediately after the second game.

    Rays 0 0 0 2 -- 2
    Blue Jays 0 0 0 1 -- 1

    The Rays win the extra innings 2 to 1 and get to play in the LDS.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rich the Giants fan
    replied
    Originally posted by Matthew C. View Post
    Then make it a 3 game series - either way, the bets team get what is due them and the field isn't over-saturated. Even though, I really didn't mind 27% of the league making the postseason. 33% is really pushing it.
    I prefer the WC round just one game.

    Leave a comment:


  • StanTheMan
    replied
    Understood...

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by StanTheMan View Post
    Except it has been noted, by players, that it is something they worry about NOW. When a team starts a Division series before the other series in their league, sweep or win quickly, while the other series goes the distance. Was it the Yankees a few years ago that had to wait a long time for their next series? They don't like having four or five idle days. 10+ would be quite something.

    "Live" pitching and game pitching are similar, but not the same thing. Defense, pitchers, could be a slight factor for all.
    Then make it a 3 game series - either way, the bets team get what is due them and the field isn't over-saturated. Even though, I really didn't mind 27% of the league making the postseason. 33% is really pushing it.

    Leave a comment:


  • StanTheMan
    replied
    Originally posted by ipitch View Post
    That should really never be an excuse for a MLB team. If they wanted to, they could face live pitching every day.
    Except it has been noted, by players, that it is something they worry about NOW. When a team starts a Division series before the other series in their league, sweep or win quickly, while the other series goes the distance. Was it the Yankees a few years ago that had to wait a long time for their next series? They don't like having four or five idle days. 10+ would be quite something.

    "Live" pitching and game pitching are similar, but not the same thing. Defense, pitchers, could be a slight factor for all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by ipitch View Post
    That should really never be an excuse for a MLB team. If they wanted to, they could face live pitching every day.
    Yeah, I never bought in to the "days off, hot/cold" thing. The bye is WAY more valuable than the potential cost of sitting for a week, which could also allow for nursing injuries, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • ipitch
    replied
    Originally posted by StanTheMan View Post
    Top team gets a bye while the other two play up to seven games over presumably 9+ days? Wow. Can't see much support for that, especially from the teams sitting for nearly a week and a half, then hauling cold bats to the plate in game 1.
    That should really never be an excuse for a MLB team. If they wanted to, they could face live pitching every day.

    Leave a comment:


  • StanTheMan
    replied
    Top team gets a bye while the other two play up to seven games over presumably 9+ days? Wow. Can't see much support for that, especially from the teams sitting for nearly a week and a half, then hauling cold bats to the plate in game 1.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by Rich the Giants fan View Post
    I am finding myself, surprisingly, in favor of this new added Wild Card. I like how one of the two is guaranteed to only play one post-season game, and the other has to win a total of 12 games to win the WS, rather than 11 like everyone else. I like how it makes winning the division much more enticing than settling for the WC. I'd rather eliminate Wild Cards altogether, but this format, with any flaws it may have, is better than the previous WC format.
    I agree. The fact that the Wild Card winners over the past 17 years have had a better mean winning% than the 3rd best division winner made the distinction between WC winner and Division winner pretty meaningless. In over 20% of all possible occasions, the Wild Card team had a better record than two division winners. Though, I do not get too worked up abut the title anyway. I'd rather a 93-win wild card team win than a 81 win Padres or Rangers win.

    If I had my first choice, I would have everybody in one 15-team division and the top 3 teams advanced. the top team got a bye and the 2nd and 3rd place teams had a 7-game round to make it to the NLCS. that way we wouldn't have to worry about the distinction between division winner and wild card.

    Leave a comment:


  • SamtheBravesFan
    replied
    Palpable? I felt as tortured as when the Braves were blowing their lead in 2011. It was awful!

    Leave a comment:


  • Tadasimha
    replied
    I was opposed to the 2nd wild card at first but after seeing the season unfold, I'm now fan. The last three weeks of the season were full of meaningful games and it made following it much more interesting. The one game play-offs were intense - the desperation of the fans and players for Atlantic and Texas as the games went on was palpable.

    I may be the only one who likes the 2-3 format. I like how condensed the LDS series are and I appreciate the fact that the team with the worst record faces a tough battle to possibly win the series on the road. If the team with the better record can't at least split the series on the road, they should have to prove they're good enough to move on by winning three straight at home.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rich the Giants fan
    replied
    I am finding myself, surprisingly, in favor of this new added Wild Card. I like how one of the two is guaranteed to only play one post-season game, and the other has to win a total of 12 games to win the WS, rather than 11 like everyone else. I like how it makes winning the division much more enticing than settling for the WC. I'd rather eliminate Wild Cards altogether, but this format, with any flaws it may have, is better than the previous WC format.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pere
    replied
    It doesn't make much sense to further complicate the structure for the sake of giving a harder road to one of two WC teams. Schedule differences mean that there is no objective basis for saying one is more deserving than another--except by simply having them play each other. The only essentially objective thing one can say about WC teams is that they have not shown themselves as worthy, in the RS, as their respective division winners. So letting any WC team continue to play at all has to mean conceptually setting aside RS records as fully telling.

    If it was somehow desirable to work in another WC qualifying game, you might as well stage it between the "fifth" and "sixth" teams, with the winner moving on to play the "fourth." But the current format seems to meet the need it was designed for, to value divisional championships while yielding a fourth DS team.

    The real adjustment that needs to happen is the standardization of intradivisional schedules, which will be easier with the uniformly-sized divisions next year. Not that I'm aware it is a priority for MLB.
    Last edited by Pere; 10-07-2012, 08:20 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by StanTheMan View Post
    With the schedules being different for the two teams through 162 games, I don't think I like the idea...
    Lets say if the Dodgers this year were to have played much tougher schedule than the Cardinals, hypothetically. Then that unfair scenario is already taking place. SOS has kept many teams out of the postseason.
    Last edited by Bothrops Atrox; 10-07-2012, 05:42 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X