Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (Buckhead)

    Baseball Wildcard - Beating a Dead Horse

    This, from FoxSports.com...

    Just one strike from postseason elimination on the final weekend of the season, the Rockies have become a charmed team that seemingly cannot lose. This marked the sixth straight year that a wild-card club reached the World Series.

    Six straight years with the wild card team in the World Series? I'm pulling for Colorado, but can't something be done to put the division winners at a much earned advantage over wild card teams. Just doesn't seem right.

    -EarlJam

  2. #2
    It's because the division winners are doing the proverbial "slow it down" offense that K prefers at the end of their season. The wild card team plays hard right into the playoffs, thus giving them the advantage.

    Whether it be basketball or baseball, when your ahead what do you do? Continue to play hard and risk injury or play conservatively and lose momentum?

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlJam View Post
    This, from FoxSports.com...

    Just one strike from postseason elimination on the final weekend of the season, the Rockies have become a charmed team that seemingly cannot lose. This marked the sixth straight year that a wild-card club reached the World Series.

    Six straight years with the wild card team in the World Series? I'm pulling for Colorado, but can't something be done to put the division winners at a much earned advantage over wild card teams. Just doesn't seem right.

    -EarlJam
    I am even more dumbfounded than ever by this criticism. The NL wildcard race was one of the most interesting races this year (although it came to a tragic ending for this Padres fan), and Colorado has been a great, great storyline to watch. How is it a bad thing to give teams something to play for, when they might have just packed it in without the wildcard out there?

    And why should the division champ get an advantage? The division champ in a different division may very well be worse than the wildcard team.

    Finally, division winners should take care of business on the field. If they can't beat the wildcard team, they simply do not deserve to advance. There is no crying in baseball.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlJam View Post
    can't something be done to put the division winners at a much earned advantage over wild card teams. Just doesn't seem right.

    -EarlJam
    The beauty of sports, on any level, is that on any given day David can beat Goliath. Occasionally a wild card team is better than a division winner, even during the regular season. But because of the division they are in, they end up being a wild card.

    As with all sports it only matters that you peak in the playoffs versus during the season. Many a time I have been glad Duke has lost towards the end of the season knowing that once "the dance" started they COULDN'T lose.

    The only way to go back to division winners having an advantage is for only division winners to make the playoffs. That should apply in all sports, but then Duke may not win a NC if that were the case. But let's face it, the capitalism that has taken over sports, i.e. networks making loads of money for showing sporting events, will not accept only division winners being in the playoffs. It will cut into profits.

    Aww, I'm Shelden Williams.
    Last edited by TillyGalore; 10-16-2007 at 10:37 AM. Reason: Shelden Williams.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati/Columbus
    What more disadvantage can there be? They swept two straight division winners on their home field and took care of business when they got back to Coors. And so many of the National Leauge races were tight to the ned I don't buy the slowing it down arguement

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    And now they have to wait 8 days to play the Indians or Red Sox. Cue 47 sports columnists talking in identical columns about how this will damage the Rockies.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    ← Bay / Valley ↓
    Quote Originally Posted by riverside6 View Post
    It's because the division winners are doing the proverbial "slow it down" offense that K prefers at the end of their season. The wild card team plays hard right into the playoffs, thus giving them the advantage.

    Whether it be basketball or baseball, when your ahead what do you do? Continue to play hard and risk injury or play conservatively and lose momentum?
    Usually, yes. But this year that was not the case - all 3 NL championship races were determined by 2 or fewer games. On the AL side, even the wildcard wasn't much of a race, with the Yankees winning it by 6 games, and IIRC never really being in danger of missing the playoffs.*

    * I should add, never being in danger of missing the playoffs, towards the end of the season :-p
    Last edited by hc5duke; 10-16-2007 at 11:33 AM. Reason: adding more comment

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (Buckhead)
    Quote Originally Posted by jkidd31 View Post
    What more disadvantage can there be? They swept two straight division winners on their home field and took care of business when they got back to Coors. And so many of the National Leauge races were tight to the ned I don't buy the slowing it down arguement
    I'm not only talking about Colorado this year. Heck, it IS a great story line and I'm pulling for them.

    I'm just talking overall. Baseball is different from football and basketball for all the reasons that have been listed here before. It's easier in baseball for a less talented team to get hot and take out a team that earned a divisional championship over six months of play.

    I'm not Diehard against the wildcard; just wish they'd modify the rules a little bit to reward the division winners.

    -EarlJam

  9. #9
    But division winners already are rewarded. They get home field advantage. That they don't use that advantage is no one's fault but their own.

    As others have pointed out, oftentimes the Wild Cards have better 162-game records than some of the division winners. There have been numerous cases where the Wild Card was clearly the second best team in the League. And by virtue of the fact they didn't win their division, they're often in the toughest of the three divisions in the league. So it's even more difficult to say that a Wild Card team with a record a few games worse than that of the division winner in another, oftentimes weaker, division, is "worse" than that division winner.

    I hated the Wild Card when it was implemented, but have come to appreciate the horse now that it's not going back in the barn. That they seem to be winning disproportionately seems to me likely a statistical anomaly. If you really need to "fix" the situation, then stretching the LDS out to 7 games would be a reasonable solution. But the other proposals out there, like choosing one more Wild Card and having a one game playoff to ensure their pitching is a little more depleted, or giving the Wild Card only one home game, or requiring them to win 4 out of 5 to win the LDS, are silly. They make a mockery of the idea of straight-up competition. If we're going to tilt the playing field to stop the Wild Card from making the World Series, then we should just go back to a four team postseason.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Mal View Post
    But the other proposals out there, like choosing one more Wild Card and having a one game playoff to ensure their pitching is a little more depleted . . . are silly.
    And besides, the Rockies had to play that extra game this year, going to extra innings no less. If anything, this year is vindication of the wild card.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by hc5duke View Post
    Usually, yes. But this year that was not the case - all 3 NL championship races were determined by 2 or fewer games. On the AL side, even the wildcard wasn't much of a race, with the Yankees winning it by 6 games, and IIRC never really being in danger of missing the playoffs.*

    * I should add, never being in danger of missing the playoffs, towards the end of the season :-p
    Admittedly, I was thinking about my Cubbies, who clinched with 3 games remaining. The final 3 games of the season, no starter played an entire game, and no starting pitcher went deeper than 5 innings.

    It was very apparent they were flat against the D-Backs. I guess I was painting with a broad brush, but I think there is something to the theory, but I'm sure it isn't the only factor.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by Mal View Post
    But division winners already are rewarded. They get home field advantage. That they don't use that advantage is no one's fault but their own.
    Actually, one of the three doesn't.

    I could see a system in which all four berth are Wild Carded. i.e., the best four records make the playoffs.

    The problem with that is SOS. 85-77 in the NL Central is like dollars to sterling.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    Actually, one of the three doesn't.
    True enough. Imprecise wording on my part - I just meant the one that draws the Wild Card in the LDS.

    I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to taking the best 4 records, but as you noted you'd have to do away with the unbalanced schedule. In which case you may as well do away with the divisions entirely.

    Which is worse, (a) the balanced schedule, where it's justifiable for the 94-win team who doesn't make the playoffs to whine about the 92-win division winner that does, or (b) the unbalanced schedule, where the better teams in weak divisions just feast on the crummy teams, so it's justifiable for the 92-win team in the A.L. East that doesn't make the playoffs to whine about how easy it was for the winner of the weak division to amass their 94 wins? I don't know.

  14. #14
    Question: How much does having 6 teams in the NL Central adversely affect the number of wins the NL Central winner finishes with?

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by riverside6 View Post
    Question: How much does having 6 teams in the NL Central adversely affect the number of wins the NL Central winner finishes with?
    Zero, I think. It might affect the overall difficulty of winning the division in any given year, since you have to beat out five competitors instead of four (or three, if you're in the AL West). But I think they get the same number of games against their intradivision rivals as the teams in the other divisions play against theirs, don't they? They just have fewer games each against those five teams than the others have against their four intradivision rivals.

    Is that right? Am I even making sense? Where's Bill James?

    I think you can chalk up the NL Central's generally low winning total to the fact that they're all pretty weak. If anything, a good team in the NL Central should get a boost in their win total, by virtue of the unbalanced schedule giving them more games against Cinci, Pittsburgh and whoever than, say, the Mets or Braves get.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by riverside6 View Post
    Question: How much does having 6 teams in the NL Central adversely affect the number of wins the NL Central winner finishes with?
    As long as the bottom 3 are terrible, it helps them.

    Put it another way. Q: How much does having 4 teams in the AL West increase the number of wins the AL West winner finishes with? A: depends on how strong the other 3 are relative to the rest of the league.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by riverside6 View Post
    Question: How much does having 6 teams in the NL Central adversely affect the number of wins the NL Central winner finishes with?
    Doesn't appear to at all. In 2001, 2004, and 2005 the NL Central winner had the most wins in the NL. In 2001, actually both St. Louis and Houston had more wins than anyone else in the NL.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlJam View Post
    Six straight years with the wild card team in the World Series? I'm pulling for Colorado, but can't something be done to put the division winners at a much earned advantage over wild card teams. Just doesn't seem right.

    -EarlJam
    Ever heard of the this year's Yankees? IIRC, they were hot as well, and went out in the first round.

    What's been the overall performance of wild card teams?
    2007: Rockies: World Series; Yankees: out in first round
    2006: Detroit: World Series; Dodgers: out in first round
    2005: Houston: World Series; BoSox: out in first round
    2004: BoSox: World Series; Houston: out in second round
    2003: Florida: World Series; BoSox out in second round
    2002: Anaheim: World Series; SF: World Series
    2001: Oakland & St.Louis don't survive first round
    2000: Mutts: World Series; Seattle out in first round
    1999: Mutts & BoSox: out in second round

    Looks like 2002 was the only year where Wild Card domination occurred. That was preceded by a year when the WC's bombed out in the first round.

    Please note: The National League WC's first round series wins in 2002, 2004, and 2005 were against ... the Atlanta Braves. That might explain part of the WC success.

    Perhaps Mal is correct, and that the first round should be best of 7, instead of best of 5. The Braves folks sometimes point to the fact that in a best of 5, you only have to face two hot pitchers to lose a series, whereas in a best of seven, you really need three pitchers.

    Cheers,
    Lavabe
    Last edited by Lavabe; 10-17-2007 at 04:38 AM. Reason: Mal reference

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (Buckhead)
    Quote Originally Posted by Lavabe View Post
    Perhaps Mal is correct, and that the first round should be best of 7, instead of best of 5. The Braves folks sometimes point to the fact that in a best of 5, you only have to face two hot pitchers to lose a series, whereas in a best of seven, you really need three pitchers.

    Cheers,
    Lavabe
    Well I completely agree with that. A five game series changes everything. Make is seven and extend the season by 2-3 days. Wouldn't hurt and I think it would be more fair.

    Next Year: Baltimore Orioles! World Series Champions! Oh, and also wild blue monkees will fly out of my lower oriface!

    -EarlJam

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlJam View Post

    Next Year: Baltimore Orioles! World Series Champions! Oh, and also wild blue monkees will fly out of my lower oriface!

    -EarlJam
    Rockies finished in last place last year, ya never know.

Similar Threads

  1. Hurley Horse Happenings - '08 Edition
    By DevilHorse in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 114
    Last Post: 10-06-2008, 08:20 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-27-2008, 08:22 PM
  3. Sort of Duke Horse Happening
    By DevilHorse in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-23-2008, 08:17 PM
  4. Hurley Horse Happenings - Dagger
    By DevilHorse in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 11-26-2007, 04:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •