Joined: 05 Feb 2008 Posts: 3242 Location: Mid-Wilshire: just beyond "The Puff Puff Pass"
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 12:17 am Post subject: 2015 MLB Playoff Thread
Well fellow Laker fans, its that time of the year, where some of us shall travel different paths...but only for a short time.....but since we're all here....let's get things off to a rollicking start...Shouldn't it be the Dodgers playing the Mets in the one game wild card playoff game???...unfortunately for the NL Central the answer is no...that's not what the current rules say...but this will be the beginning of MLB moving to where the NBA just got to....seeded by your record
There's no way the three teams with the best record in ALL OF BASEBALL should have to play each other in a round robin to have one team come out...not only do those three teams have the best records, buy all three played two other teams with the best record in the MLB more than anyone other than MIL and CIN...Good Luck to all.....btw .....chirp chirp!!
Last edited by Qsmiff on Mon Oct 05, 2015 2:01 am; edited 1 time in total
I don't agree about seeding. The scheduling in baseball is uneven, which means that the division races are actually meaningful. We have the Rangers, Astros, and Angels going into the final weekend with a shot at the AL West season and even a possibility of a 163rd game for the second wild card (though I expect my Astros to crash out). That is what the MLB system is supposed to produce. Winning your division means something. We don't dump sixteen teams into a seeded playoff that is essentially a second season.
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:43 am Post subject: Re: MLB and soon to be 2015 MLB Playoff Thread
Qsmiff wrote:
Well fellow Laker fans, its that time of the year, where some of us shall travel different paths...but only for a short time.....but since we're all here....let's get things off to a rollicking start...Shouldn't it be the Dodgers playing the Mets in the one game wild card playoff game???...unfortunately for the NL Central the answer is no...that's not what the current rules say...but this will be the beginning of MLB moving to where the NBA just got to....seeded by your record
There's no way the three teams with the best record in ALL OF BASEBALL should have to play each other in a round robin to have one team come out...not only do those three teams have the best records, buy all three played two other teams with the best record in the MLB more than anyone other than MIL and CIN...Good Luck to all.....btw .....chirp chirp!!
Disagree. Unlike the NBA, MLB has bigger traditions to uphold...yeah, its been watered down by adding the wild card teams into the playoff race back in the mid 90's, and even more so with the addition of the 2nd wildcard.
Last edited by lakersken80 on Thu Oct 01, 2015 9:46 am; edited 1 time in total
I don't agree about seeding. The scheduling in baseball is uneven, which means that the division races are actually meaningful. We have the Rangers, Astros, and Angels going into the final weekend with a shot at the AL West season and even a possibility of a 163rd game for the second wild card (though I expect my Astros to crash out). That is what the MLB system is supposed to produce. Winning your division means something. We don't dump sixteen teams into a seeded playoff that is essentially a second season.
Disagree about seeding too. Winning your division is the way to the playoffs. Getting the wild card should only be considered a back door in. Also scheduling is uneven. Teams in the pacific timezone are at a disadvantage. That's part of the reason they're guaranteed a spot if they win the division.
Not understanding why seeding(rewarding teams for their actual won-loss records) is good for the NBA, but not for the MLB.
Because teams in MLB play teams in their own division much more than teams in other divisions. In the NBA, the difference is only a game or 2. The Dodgers play the Giants 19 times but the Cardinals only 7. The teams in a division are battling each other all season long to win that division title. Roughly half a team's games are against their own division. The reward for that isn't going to be a one game wild card. Pirates and Cubs fans can complain all they want, but they didn't win their division. They should just be thankful the NL has an odd number of divisions causing the Wild Card to exist. This doesn't even take into account travel differences between divisions.
Getting the best record in your respective lead should allow you to pick your opponent.
The Cardinals win the national league and have to face the pirates or the cubs in the first round, when any other team would likely be an easier first round opponent. Let the Cardinals play the Mets, and the Dodgers play the Cubs/Pirates. That's your reward for winning the marathon of a season.
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 Posts: 20351 Location: Are you a bad enough dude to read my posts?
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:58 am Post subject:
rwongega wrote:
Brandon98 wrote:
I'd prefer a best-of-3 rather than one game playoff for the wild card.
Of course, the Pirates will have to face Arietta in that one game, so as a Cubs fan I really shouldn't complain.
Of course, as a long suffering Cubs fan, you do have to consider the high probability that Arrieta gives up as much runs in just that game as he has the entire post-All Star half.
Sadly, my gut tells me all those earned runs will probably pour in during the 2nd inning also, quickly ending the magic from this season. I still feel this group is different from the band of misfits that Cubs' playoff teams used to be composed of, but too many years of bizarre (bleep) ups have conditioned me otherwise.
Joined: 26 Apr 2004 Posts: 17197 Location: In a no-ship
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 10:49 am Post subject:
Brandon98 wrote:
I'd prefer a best-of-3 rather than one game playoff for the wild card.
Of course, the Pirates will have to face Arietta in that one game, so as a Cubs fan I really shouldn't complain.
This would be a huge negative for the #1 seed. Not only do they have to wait and lose any momentum they have (look that that did to the '07 Rockies), but they'd have to face the wild card's ace rather than their #2 starter. I don't agree with punishing the #1 overall seed and division winner to help out a wild card.
I'd prefer a best-of-3 rather than one game playoff for the wild card.
Of course, the Pirates will have to face Arietta in that one game, so as a Cubs fan I really shouldn't complain.
I would prefer three games, too, but the whole thing is messed up. There is always a possibility of a 163rd game. This year, there is a possibility of a three way tie, with Houston hosting Minnesota on Monday and the winner hosting the Angels on Tuesday. If the winner played the Yankees in three games, the playoffs wouldn't start until next weekend. Now throw in some rain in New York . . . .
I'm happy that my Astros still have a chance (though I expect them to fold in Arizona), but I think the second wild card was a mistake. Unless we require all of the northern teams to build domes, the playoffs just can't be extended much. Yes, winter is coming.
Joined: 20 Jul 2005 Posts: 20510 Location: UCLA -> NY
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2015 3:33 pm Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Brandon98 wrote:
I'd prefer a best-of-3 rather than one game playoff for the wild card.
Of course, the Pirates will have to face Arietta in that one game, so as a Cubs fan I really shouldn't complain.
I would prefer three games, too, but the whole thing is messed up. There is always a possibility of a 163rd game. This year, there is a possibility of a three way tie, with Houston hosting Minnesota on Monday and the winner hosting the Angels on Tuesday. If the winner played the Yankees in three games, the playoffs wouldn't start until next weekend. Now throw in some rain in New York . . . .
I'm happy that my Astros still have a chance (though I expect them to fold in Arizona), but I think the second wild card was a mistake. Unless we require all of the northern teams to build domes, the playoffs just can't be extended much. Yes, winter is coming.
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 Posts: 20351 Location: Are you a bad enough dude to read my posts?
Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2015 11:35 am Post subject:
DuncanIdaho wrote:
Brandon98 wrote:
I'd prefer a best-of-3 rather than one game playoff for the wild card.
Of course, the Pirates will have to face Arietta in that one game, so as a Cubs fan I really shouldn't complain.
This would be a huge negative for the #1 seed. Not only do they have to wait and lose any momentum they have (look that that did to the '07 Rockies), but they'd have to face the wild card's ace rather than their #2 starter. I don't agree with punishing the #1 overall seed and division winner to help out a wild card.
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
I would prefer three games, too, but the whole thing is messed up. There is always a possibility of a 163rd game. This year, there is a possibility of a three way tie, with Houston hosting Minnesota on Monday and the winner hosting the Angels on Tuesday. If the winner played the Yankees in three games, the playoffs wouldn't start until next weekend. Now throw in some rain in New York . . . .
I'm happy that my Astros still have a chance (though I expect them to fold in Arizona), but I think the second wild card was a mistake. Unless we require all of the northern teams to build domes, the playoffs just can't be extended much. Yes, winter is coming.
Very fair points from both of you, and yes, a #1 seed really shouldn't be penalized.
I guess my issue is more with just the 1-game scenario with the other factors aside. 1-game feels very half ass to me in terms of a playoff expansion. Unless it's football, I feel like some type of series is necessary to determine in a winner. One game is a bit too much of a crapshoot, and at least three games would reduce some of that variance. Three games also feels like the natural step to play considering the divisional rounds are best of five.
Definitely cannot have the rest of the teams sitting on their thumbs though doing nothing (especially pitchers who are conditioned to go every five days), so I understand that argument. Only way I could think of trying to pull it off would be cramming that those three game series' into the few off days that occur at the end of the season before the playoffs. No travel days for the wild card teams, just get them out there playing. Even then though, you have the issue with the occasional tiebreaker games that also have to be played like AH mentioned.
Astros at Yankees: I would have laughed at this a week ago. My Astros are a terrible road team. We had the worst road record in the AL, even after going 4-2 to finish the season. I wonder how many teams with a 33-48 road record have ever made the playoffs. I'm sure someone in the media will look it up. On top of that, we're pitching Keuchel on three days rest. Having said that, though, the Yankees have been awful of late. The 'Stros have a punchers chance of winning the honor of getting smacked around by the Royals next week.
Cubs at Pirates: The fact that this is a one-game wild card series is a talking point by itself, as we have seen. Everyone in the media seems to think that this will be a pitching duel, but that usually is a recipe for a slugfest. It just seems fitting (in an ironic sense) that a 98 win team would get eliminated in one game. so I'll pick the Cubs in this one.
I'd prefer a best-of-3 rather than one game playoff for the wild card.
Of course, the Pirates will have to face Arietta in that one game, so as a Cubs fan I really shouldn't complain.
I would prefer three games, too, but the whole thing is messed up. There is always a possibility of a 163rd game. This year, there is a possibility of a three way tie, with Houston hosting Minnesota on Monday and the winner hosting the Angels on Tuesday. If the winner played the Yankees in three games, the playoffs wouldn't start until next weekend. Now throw in some rain in New York . . . .
I'm happy that my Astros still have a chance (though I expect them to fold in Arizona), but I think the second wild card was a mistake. Unless we require all of the northern teams to build domes, the playoffs just can't be extended much. Yes, winter is coming.
I hate the wild card in general but then again I remember when playing to have the best record in the division was seen as very prestigious in baseball. I think adding a second wild card dilutes the importance of playing for the best record even further, but I guess this is the MLB's way of trying to get more teams and cities into the playoff hunt and generate more interest.
Yeah it's disgusting how good that division is. It's even more pronounced than the NBA WC. It's like if it were 2000 and the Spurs/Kings/Lakers were in on division.
I don't have the answer to this, but has there ever been a time, in any sport ever where the three bets records in the entire sport was in one division? It's insane. Ribeye with the answer maybe?
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15Next
Page 1 of 15
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum