Jump to content

Motor City Sonics

16 Team playoffs are here to stay.........

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Shelton said:

Not so fast. The blue jays have 8 games in 7 days against the Phillies and yanks. We are only five games back. After the tigers take the next three and the jays suffer a four game sweep at the hands of the Phillies, we will only be 1.5 games back. Then after the jays lose to the yanks on Monday we will only be 1 game back after our off day. 

yes.  after we take the next three.

it will just like 1987 all over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, tiger337 said:

It changes the playoffs, but I don't think going from 8 to 10 teams changes the season that much.  You still have basically the same types of teams batting for playoff spots.  With 16 teams you are going from mostly good teams battling for spots to mediocre teams battling for spots.  

I don’t really know how to quantify “changes the season.” But I do think that if you create a substantial incentive to finish first within a sub-group of teams loosely affiliated with each other based on geography, then you have done something to substantially change to the season, and going from 8 to 10 did that.

In summary, divisions are stupid and rewarding division winners is stupid and the 10 team setup is stupid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shelton said:

I don’t really know how to quantify “changes the season.” But I do think that if you create a substantial incentive to finish first within a sub-group of teams loosely affiliated with each other based on geography, then you have done something to substantially change to the season, and going from 8 to 10 did that.

In summary, divisions are stupid and rewarding division winners is stupid and the 10 team setup is stupid. 

I agree that small divisions are stupid.  I would rather see no divisions and balanced schedules and just take the top X teams.   I think when they expand to 32 teams, there will be even more divisions.   I didn't really see the 10-division setup as rewarding division winners so  much as punishing the fourth best team.  I don't mind that because I don't think the fourth best team in a league has anything to complain about in regards to playoff status.  I thought the one-game playoff was dumb, but until they get rid of divisions it's all stupid to me anyway.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

I agree that small divisions are stupid.  I would rather see no divisions and balanced schedules and just take the top X teams.   I think when they expand to 32 teams, there will be even more divisions.   I didn't really see the 10-division setup as rewarding division winners so  much as punishing the fourth best team.  I don't mind that because I don't think the fourth best team in a league has anything to complain about in regards to playoff status.  I thought the one-game playoff was dumb, but until they get rid of divisions it's all stupid to me anyway.  

The 4-seed doesn’t have to be “the fourth best team.” Frequently it is not. I 

I think everyone agrees that seeding and home field advantage has little effect on likelihood of advancing. Indeed, back when they did four teams per league, the fourth seeded wildcard wouldn’t play the top seeded division winner if they were in the same division. And for the most part no one seemed to care, which is the correct reaction. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I have seen a lot of is people going back to past years to say “look at the sub-.500 teams that would have made a 16 team playoff field.” I don’t think that is a valid criticism. For one thing, I don’t see a substantial difference between a team that finished 82-80 vs a team that finished 80-82. But even granting that .500 is an important line of demarcation, if those seasons had been played with a 16 team playoff field, I think it is likely that many of those 8th place teams would have made more of an effort to improve their team in order to qualify, rather than just playing out the string with expanded rosters or making no attempt to shore up weak spots mid-season.

That said, I do think it’s likely that allowing 16 out of 30 will end up rewarding a team that finished with more losses than wins. I guess that doesn’t personally bother me. It’s still the 8th best team that season. 
 

I do think earning one of the top seeds should provide a greater benefit in the tournament. I can’t think of another tournament that would reward their best teams less than the upcoming 16 team MLB bracket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shelton said:

One thing I have seen a lot of is people going back to past years to say “look at the sub-.500 teams that would have made a 16 team playoff field.” I don’t think that is a valid criticism. For one thing, I don’t see a substantial difference between a team that finished 82-80 vs a team that finished 80-82. But even granting that .500 is an important line of demarcation, if those seasons had been played with a 16 team playoff field, I think it is likely that many of those 8th place teams would have made more of an effort to improve their team in order to qualify, rather than just playing out the string with expanded rosters or making no attempt to shore up weak spots mid-season.

That said, I do think it’s likely that allowing 16 out of 30 will end up rewarding a team that finished with more losses than wins. I guess that doesn’t personally bother me. It’s still the 8th best team that season. 
 

I do think earning one of the top seeds should provide a greater benefit in the tournament. I can’t think of another tournament that would reward their best teams less than the upcoming 16 team MLB bracket.

I don't think there is any good way to set-up the post-season tournament in baseball which will significantly benefit the better teams.  You could have all the home games in one city, but that will hurt the fans in the other city even if the teams share the gate receipts.  You could require that the lower seeded team start with a disadvantage and has to win more games in the series than the higher seeded team.  I think that would be disconcerting for fans though because it's not what they have seen in any other sport.  Football has byes, but there is some question as to whether that is beneficial for top teams in baseball because baseball players are not accustomed to long layoffs. 

They could just admit that the post-season results have no real connection to regular season results and reward both equally, but that would defeat the league's purpose of having the tournament.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Shelton said:

The 4-seed doesn’t have to be “the fourth best team.” Frequently it is not. I 


 

 

Yes, they may have won more games than a team in another division and they all have different schedules anyway, so we don't really know their ranking.  However, I think if you're going to have divisions and you know you need to beat the four teams with similar schedules and you don't, then you lose and have to accept whatever you get it terms of playoff seeding.  The one-game playoff is stupid though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

I don't think there is any good way to set-up the post-season tournament in baseball which will significantly benefit the better teams.  You could have all the home games in one city, but that will hurt the fans in the other city even if the teams share the gate receipts.  You could require that the lower seeded team start with a disadvantage and has to win more games in the series than the higher seeded team.  I think that would be disconcerting for fans though because it's not what they have seen in any other sport.  Football has byes, but there is some question as to whether that is beneficial for top teams in baseball because baseball players are not accustomed to long layoffs. 

They could just admit that the post-season results have no real connection to regular season results and reward both equally, but that would defeat the league's purpose of having the tournament.   

 

Well, then. Sounds impossible. I guess they should just give up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Shelton said:

Well, then. Sounds impossible. I guess they should just give up. 

No, they will do whatever makes them the most money.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tiger337 said:

No, they will do whatever makes them the most money.   

Yep. Money talks the loudest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Motown Sports Blog



×
×
  • Create New...