Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2015 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby mweir145 » Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:47 pm

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/11/18/2571 ... d-playoffs

I like Jeff Sullivan's take on it.

Nov 18, 2011 - Last season, and in many seasons previous, there were eight playoff teams in Major League Baseball, with four in each league. Now, after some lengthy negotiations, Bud Selig says there will be ten playoff teams, with five in each league. Maybe as soon as next year, but definitely in time for the year after that. In addition to the existing wild card slot, there will be a second wild card slot.

This idea has been met with resistance, for a number of reasons. First and foremost, it's a change to a system that didn't seem to be in need of any change. Before, there were six division winners and two wild cards, and that worked just fine. Peaches, even. Why make it different? People will always be opposed to changes to the familiar routine, even when the changes might be necessary. There's no reason to believe that this change is necessary.

There's also been the criticism that baseball is just doing this to drum up more money, as if that's a new thing, or a surprising thing. Of course baseball is doing this for the money. No matter what they say to explain this to the fans, they've studied this issue, and determined that it will generate revenue. Baseball is a business, and more money makes businesses more successful.

But a real popular criticism, and the one I'm going to address here, is that adding a new wild card slot in each league diminishes the significance of the regular season. Under the new system, the two wild cards in each league will play a one-game playoff, with the winner advancing to the LDS. It's therefore conceivable that a league's fifth-best team could make the LDS - maybe even at the expense of the league's second-best team - simply by winning one game. "Why even play 162 games if it's going to come down to this?" some people have asked.

But there's an important thing to understand, here - the regular season and the playoffs are separate things. Completely separate things. People aren't fond of the idea of a league's fifth-best team making the playoffs because they want only the very best teams in the playoffs. They want only the very best teams in the playoffs presumably because, on some level, they want to know which team is the best. But the playoffs don't prove which team is the best. The playoffs don't prove anything.

The playoffs are random. Not completely, but mostly, and this isn't an original thought. In the playoffs, any team can beat any team, and when, say, the 2006 Cardinals win the World Series while the 2006 Mets and the 2006 Yankees and the 2006 Twins do not, well, what does that tell us, other than the Cardinals won 11 games?

The playoffs aren't about finding the best team in baseball. The regular season will usually tell you which team is the best team in baseball. It isn't perfect, but it's pretty good, because the sample size is large. The best team in baseball last season was the New York Yankees, or, maybe, the Philadelphia Phillies or the Texas Rangers. None of these three teams won the World Series, but there wasn't any outcry that the system was broken. The regular season tells you one thing, and the playoffs tell you something very different.

The playoffs feature short series, allowing for randomness. They're scheduled such that teams can manage their rosters in a different, more top-heavy way than they do during the year. Adding another wild card and a one-game playoff makes things more chaotic and increases the likelihood of an 86-win team winning the World Series, but what's more randomness in a random system?

Once you let go of the idea of the playoffs proving much of anything, I think you can embrace the change. The playoffs exist not to prove, but to provide drama, theater, unforgettable moments. Moments that can simultaneously mean nothing and everything. Now, to the existing system, we've added a pair of guaranteed one-game playoffs. The drama is both very much manufactured, and very much real. The intensity of those one-game playoffs isn't going to be artificial.

We already had a wild card. We had it for a while. The baseball playoffs might have been the most "pure" when each league's top teams met in the World Series, but it hasn't been that way since 1968. We're a long way beyond complaining that the playoffs might not reward the right teams.

You might ask, well, if you're okay with ten playoff teams, what about 12? What about 14, or 16, or, hell, why not every team? Where do you draw the line? To which my response would be, it doesn't much matter. Introduce too many teams and you have other teams waiting a long time to get started, but that isn't an issue here. We're talking about a pair of one-game playoffs, presumably to be played on the same day. That's not much of a scheduling delay.

The MLB playoffs exist to devastate and thrill, and nothing else. With the new change, there's no reason to believe they'll do that any worse, and they could easily do that better. Change is change, and change can suck, but I suspect that we'll all adjust to this one in no time. We might even love it. Those one-game playoffs are gonna be sweet.


The playoffs are already mostly random and don't really prove anything, so making it slightly more random really doesn't change much.
25
mweir145
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Eagle Eye
Posts: 16784
(Past Year: 2)
Joined: 3 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Toronto

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby lastingsgriller » Mon Nov 21, 2011 3:16 am

you know, when I really started getting into baseball, It was during the '89 season. As far as I am concerned, the entire system was perfect at this point in time. 4 divisions. 4 playoff teams. winning a division championship really meant something. for some reason, Bud keeps changing things. soon enough, It will be like basketball and half the teams in the league will make the playoffs.

can't wait for the 2021 world series where the 68-66 Reds beat the 71-63 Royals.
Follow me on the twit! @chadmiller16
lastingsgriller
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe Ranker
Posts: 3882
(Past Year: 171)
Joined: 21 Jan 2009
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: ..skipping the light fandango.

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby J35J » Mon Nov 21, 2011 9:41 am

mweir145 wrote:http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/11/18/2571900/mlb-new-wild-card-playoffs

I like Jeff Sullivan's take on it.

Nov 18, 2011 - Last season, and in many seasons previous, there were eight playoff teams in Major League Baseball, with four in each league. Now, after some lengthy negotiations, Bud Selig says there will be ten playoff teams, with five in each league. Maybe as soon as next year, but definitely in time for the year after that. In addition to the existing wild card slot, there will be a second wild card slot.

This idea has been met with resistance, for a number of reasons. First and foremost, it's a change to a system that didn't seem to be in need of any change. Before, there were six division winners and two wild cards, and that worked just fine. Peaches, even. Why make it different? People will always be opposed to changes to the familiar routine, even when the changes might be necessary. There's no reason to believe that this change is necessary.

There's also been the criticism that baseball is just doing this to drum up more money, as if that's a new thing, or a surprising thing. Of course baseball is doing this for the money. No matter what they say to explain this to the fans, they've studied this issue, and determined that it will generate revenue. Baseball is a business, and more money makes businesses more successful.

But a real popular criticism, and the one I'm going to address here, is that adding a new wild card slot in each league diminishes the significance of the regular season. Under the new system, the two wild cards in each league will play a one-game playoff, with the winner advancing to the LDS. It's therefore conceivable that a league's fifth-best team could make the LDS - maybe even at the expense of the league's second-best team - simply by winning one game. "Why even play 162 games if it's going to come down to this?" some people have asked.

But there's an important thing to understand, here - the regular season and the playoffs are separate things. Completely separate things. People aren't fond of the idea of a league's fifth-best team making the playoffs because they want only the very best teams in the playoffs. They want only the very best teams in the playoffs presumably because, on some level, they want to know which team is the best. But the playoffs don't prove which team is the best. The playoffs don't prove anything.

The playoffs are random. Not completely, but mostly, and this isn't an original thought. In the playoffs, any team can beat any team, and when, say, the 2006 Cardinals win the World Series while the 2006 Mets and the 2006 Yankees and the 2006 Twins do not, well, what does that tell us, other than the Cardinals won 11 games?

The playoffs aren't about finding the best team in baseball. The regular season will usually tell you which team is the best team in baseball. It isn't perfect, but it's pretty good, because the sample size is large. The best team in baseball last season was the New York Yankees, or, maybe, the Philadelphia Phillies or the Texas Rangers. None of these three teams won the World Series, but there wasn't any outcry that the system was broken. The regular season tells you one thing, and the playoffs tell you something very different.

The playoffs feature short series, allowing for randomness. They're scheduled such that teams can manage their rosters in a different, more top-heavy way than they do during the year. Adding another wild card and a one-game playoff makes things more chaotic and increases the likelihood of an 86-win team winning the World Series, but what's more randomness in a random system?

Once you let go of the idea of the playoffs proving much of anything, I think you can embrace the change. The playoffs exist not to prove, but to provide drama, theater, unforgettable moments. Moments that can simultaneously mean nothing and everything. Now, to the existing system, we've added a pair of guaranteed one-game playoffs. The drama is both very much manufactured, and very much real. The intensity of those one-game playoffs isn't going to be artificial.

We already had a wild card. We had it for a while. The baseball playoffs might have been the most "pure" when each league's top teams met in the World Series, but it hasn't been that way since 1968. We're a long way beyond complaining that the playoffs might not reward the right teams.

You might ask, well, if you're okay with ten playoff teams, what about 12? What about 14, or 16, or, hell, why not every team? Where do you draw the line? To which my response would be, it doesn't much matter. Introduce too many teams and you have other teams waiting a long time to get started, but that isn't an issue here. We're talking about a pair of one-game playoffs, presumably to be played on the same day. That's not much of a scheduling delay.

The MLB playoffs exist to devastate and thrill, and nothing else. With the new change, there's no reason to believe they'll do that any worse, and they could easily do that better. Change is change, and change can suck, but I suspect that we'll all adjust to this one in no time. We might even love it. Those one-game playoffs are gonna be sweet.


The playoffs are already mostly random and don't really prove anything, so making it slightly more random really doesn't change much.


I like this as well.
J35J
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 10467
(Past Year: 358)
Joined: 26 Jan 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby converge241 » Mon Nov 21, 2011 9:53 am

I don't like watering down and adding playoff teams in general but since they were set on doing this I am so thankful they went with a one game playoff rather than another series. Can you imagine those teams waiting around and getting "cold" and all from even a 3 game series? Plus this makes winning the division more important which is always a good thing ;-D. The wildcards should have a tough road - they didnt win their division(s) so them having to play another game of large magnitude with short travel etc is perfectly fitting.

I like that they are looking at removing that rule that says same division teams cant meet 1st round as well
"I'm the man with the ball. I'm the man who can throw it faster than F***. So that's why I'm better than anyone in the world." - Kenny Powers
converge241
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3192
(Past Year: 100)
Joined: 19 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby bigh0rt » Mon Nov 21, 2011 10:33 am

Sullivan (and many others) use the word 'random' to describe the playoffs very frequently, but then he went on to say something that, in my opinion, conflicts with the opinion of the 'randomness' and is much more accurate (the bolded):
The playoffs feature short series, allowing for randomness. They're scheduled such that teams can manage their rosters in a different, more top-heavy way than they do during the year.

It's the same difference I was trying to address while the playoffs were going on. When your schedule is different, and you structure your roster differently as a result, you're a different team. Some teams get better and some teams get worse as a result. There's, of course, a hot/cold factor for success in the playoffs, but I feel like what is quoted goes almost completely unaddressed, and is passed off as 'randomness'.
Image
bigh0rt
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 24818
(Past Year: 301)
Joined: 3 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Crowding The Plate

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby bigh0rt » Mon Nov 21, 2011 10:36 am

Although I do 100% agree with this, as I described previously:
The playoffs exist not to prove, but to provide drama, theater, unforgettable moments. Moments that can simultaneously mean nothing and everything. Now, to the existing system, we've added a pair of guaranteed one-game playoffs. The drama is both very much manufactured, and very much real. The intensity of those one-game playoffs isn't going to be artificial.

If you're a fan of watching exciting baseball and not looking at FanGraphs during post-game to see if it was good or not, you've got to enjoy this. It's artificial drama, but drama all the same. Excitement is excitement, and I'm sure there will be people too ho hum to let themselves actually enjoy it; but that's a shame. It'd be nice for the MLB playoffs to actually be watchable for a change.
Image
bigh0rt
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterGraphics ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 24818
(Past Year: 301)
Joined: 3 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Crowding The Plate

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby Urban Cohorts » Mon Nov 21, 2011 11:19 am

converge241 wrote:Can you imagine those teams waiting around and getting "cold" and all from even a 3 game series?


This is something you can't prove. And probably varies from player to player. Though MLB could have structured a 3 game series in 1-2 days if they wanted to...

converge241 wrote:The wildcards should have a tough road - they didnt win their division(s) so them having to play another game of large magnitude with short travel etc is perfectly fitting.


I'm still sort of torn on this myself. I like how it increases the rivalry between the Red Sox and Yankees. Winning the division will be much more important. The part I don't like is that about 50% of the time, the current wild card has a huge lead over the next closest team. That and you could wind up with the 2nd best team in MLB playing in a 1 game elimination series. That doesn't happen too often, but I couldn't imagine anyone being happy if their team was the second best in baseball and was outed by a random 1 game playoff.

bigh0rt wrote:It's the same difference I was trying to address while the playoffs were going on. When your schedule is different, and you structure your roster differently as a result, you're a different team. Some teams get better and some teams get worse as a result. There's, of course, a hot/cold factor for success in the playoffs, but I feel like what is quoted goes almost completely unaddressed, and is passed off as 'randomness'.


Yes, GMs can design a team in a way where they are better suited to win a playoff series rather than over the long haul of the season. Adding another wild card spot increases the tendency to do the former IMO. Especially if you don't think you can win the division.
Image
Urban Cohorts
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar
Cafe WriterMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1717
Joined: 2 Jan 2009
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Rome in all of its glory...

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby SpecialFNK » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:33 pm

I like the addition of the extra wild card teams. give other teams a chance.
if you're going to allow certain teams to go out and spend whatever they want, that gives those teams an advantage a lot of other teams don't have. now maybe these other teams have at least a little better chance.
I'd rather see some type of rule that controls spending more. no team should be able to spend as much as they want like the Yankees do. it's just unfair.

I'm not sure on how I feel about the wild card playoff. I don't think I really like the 1 game must win. too much can happen in 1 game, and I don't think that 1 game will prove who is the better team. for 1 game, you might as well toss a coin to see who gets in. anything can happen in 1 game. I'd rather at least see a best of 3. I don't think you need a drawn out best of 5 series, but a best of 3 could do. that still gives the importance of winning the division, and still a shot to have the best team of the wild card winners to move on.

with the new set up of having the Astros in the AL West, that means you have interleague play every day. I haven't read this anywhere, but how does that work? on each day is there only the 1 game interleague play that is needed and everyone else plays ALvsAL/NLvsNL? or is there going to be multiple interleague games every day? if there is going to be more than 1 interleague game every day then maybe baseball should make a decision on the DH rule so that it's always the same.
SpecialFNK
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 5004
(Past Year: 72)
Joined: 21 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby Tavish » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:42 pm

SpecialFNK wrote:with the new set up of having the Astros in the AL West, that means you have interleague play every day. I haven't read this anywhere, but how does that work? on each day is there only the 1 game interleague play that is needed and everyone else plays ALvsAL/NLvsNL? or is there going to be multiple interleague games every day? if there is going to be more than 1 interleague game every day then maybe baseball should make a decision on the DH rule so that it's always the same.

Well there will have to be an odd number of inter-league games being played. I don't think it has been said specifically that there will only be 1 inter-league series going at a time, but that's what I would expect for the most part.
Image

Bury me a Royal.
Tavish
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe SpotterWeb Supporter
Posts: 11071
(Past Year: 23)
Joined: 3 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Possible playoff change +2 Wild Card

Postby StlSluggers » Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:54 pm

SpecialFNK wrote:I'm not sure on how I feel about the wild card playoff. I don't think I really like the 1 game must win. too much can happen in 1 game, and I don't think that 1 game will prove who is the better team. for 1 game, you might as well toss a coin to see who gets in. anything can happen in 1 game.

Besides making more money, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that this extra wild card game is designed to punish wild card teams by making them burn their ace just to get into the playoffs. I think they're stacking the deck against the wild card teams on purpose in order to reward the division winners.
StlSluggers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 14716
Joined: 24 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Parking in the gov't bldg @ 7th and Pine. It's only $3.00 on game day!

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Izenhart and 7 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2015 MLB season starts in 16:25 hours
(and 91 days)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact