SlinkyRedfoot
Well-Known Member
Probably. Roster depth obviously matters more than regular season accomplishments and perception has to catch up with reality. Like in my mind the Mets have no chance against the Cubs because I think the Cubs are a better team based on a bunch of variables. But what happens if the young Cubs players start acting young and start doing a bunch of things because they start choking up for whatever reason? It means they probably aren't the better team. So in a way, results create the perception regardless of statistics but the statistics themselves create the matchups that dictate everything in playoff baseball.
I think one of the major factors in great teams failing is poor coaching but one of the major factors in poor coaching is a limited roster so its possible that a team's weakness isn't shown until the postseason.
Yeah, we define it differently. I've got a great reverence for the outcome of a 162-game season. THat's a grind, and you want to talk about needing depth? You need it there. I love the postseason, but the results are a smaller factor to me when deciding which was the best team in, say, 2012. The sample sizes are just too small for me.