Playoff Expansion

[calsnowskier]

It looks like the current proposal floating around is to allow a second WC team and have the 2 WC teams play a game 163 at the team with the better record's park.

One of the major current problems out there is that the WC team receives no penalties except seeding and losing home field (the same penalty as the 3rd best div winner).

I was against the idea of a game 163 playoff, but they made good arguments for it last night on MLB. It would bring a lot of extra teams into the playoff chase, but a 163 would still offer plenty of disadvantages to the WC teams that winning the division would offer lots of advantages (not having to hang all your hopes on one game, setting your rotation, home field).

Another change I would propose would be to have the WC team face the top seed team regardless of division and have the top seed have a 4-1 home-field-advantage instead of a 3-2. That would either be a 1-4 or a 2-1-2 format.

The baseball regular season is a marathon and the playoffs are a sprint. Let's not lose that dynamic. But let's make sure that the regular season still has meaning.

 

[filosofy29]

It looks like the current proposal floating around is to allow a second WC team and have the 2 WC teams play a game 163 at the team with the better record's park.

One of the major current problems out there is that the WC team receives no penalties except seeding and losing home field (the same penalty as the 3rd best div winner).

I was against the idea of a game 163 playoff, but they made good arguments for it last night on MLB. It would bring a lot of extra teams into the playoff chase, but a 163 would still offer plenty of disadvantages to the WC teams that winning the division would offer lots of advantages (not having to hang all your hopes on one game, setting your rotation, home field).

Another change I would propose would be to have the WC team face the top seed team regardless of division and have the top seed have a 4-1 home-field-advantage instead of a 3-2. That would either be a 1-4 or a 2-1-2 format.

The baseball regular season is a marathon and the playoffs are a sprint. Let's not lose that dynamic. But let's make sure that the regular season still has meaning.

I wouldn't mind a game 163 for the WC one bit. Like you said, it would keep one more team in the hunt until the very end. Also, it would eff up the WC most likely as they'd either burn their #1 or #2 starter most likely for the playoffs. I also wouldn't be opposed to a 2-1-2 format for the best overall record against he WC (regardless of division).

Do you know when (if at all) this is likely to take effect Cal?

 

[calsnowskier]

I wouldn't mind a game 163 for the WC one bit. Like you said, it would keep one more team in the hunt until the very end. Also, it would eff up the WC most likely as they'd either burn their #1 or #2 starter most likely for the playoffs. I also wouldn't be opposed to a 2-1-2 format for the best overall record against he WC (regardless of division).

Do you know when (if at all) this is likely to take effect Cal?

MLB was saying there is a decent chance of it taking effect this year ('11) and that if that is the case, they have OBVIOUSLY been working on it for at least a few years already without it leaking.

However, They also made the point that there is no way the Union would allow that big of a change without getting concessions in return, so I would say '12 at the earliest, or whenever the next CBA is up (I have no idea when that is).

 

[Heathbar012]

I would begrudgingly accept another game, but if there is going to be 2 wild card teams why not just shorten the season back to 154 games and have a 3-game series. Most of the 162 game records are meaningless now, anyway.

I don't like the 4 home games for the team with the best record idea. It's an interesting thought, but there is just too much to be gained by having last ups, your crowd and the stadium you know best for 4 out of 5 games. A lot is earned by having the best record, but not that. Plus, everyone wants to root for the underdog as long as it isn't against their team, so why make it even more difficult. I've enjoyed watching Wild Card teams make it to the Fall Classic. It's enough of a detriment to them to mess with their rotations, have to face the team with the best record and only have two home games.

Also, I would really like to see the 2-2-1-1-1 format in the LCS and WS. The traveling cross country nonsense is just that. These guys do that all season and it extends things by four total days to give them the travel days between games 4 and 7. If it's that big of a deal, shorten the season to 132 games, and get rid of interleague play other than one alternating series against the "rivals."

 

[calsnowskier]

I would begrudgingly accept another game, but if there is going to be 2 wild card teams why not just shorten the season back to 154 games and have a 3-game series. Most of the 162 game records are meaningless now, anyway.

I don't like the 4 home games for the team with the best record idea. It's an interesting thought, but there is just too much to be gained by having last ups, your crowd and the stadium you know best for 4 out of 5 games. A lot is earned by having the best record, but not that. Plus, everyone wants to root for the underdog as long as it isn't against their team, so why make it even more difficult. I've enjoyed watching Wild Card teams make it to the Fall Classic. It's enough of a detriment to them to mess with their rotations, have to face the team with the best record and only have two home games.

Also, I would really like to see the 2-2-1-1-1 format in the LCS and WS. The traveling cross country nonsense is just that. These guys do that all season and it extends things by four total days to give them the travel days between games 4 and 7. If it's that big of a deal, shorten the season to 132 games, and get rid of interleague play other than one alternating series against the "rivals."

I am not a huge fan of the 2-2-1-1-1 format. It encourages a 3-man rotation and punishes the deeper teams. Having Bum was HUGE for the G's this year because no one could throw a 4 out there who could compete.

 

[Heathbar012]

I am not a huge fan of the 2-2-1-1-1 format. It encourages a 3-man rotation and punishes the deeper teams. Having Bum was HUGE for the G's this year because no one could throw a 4 out there who could compete.

Excellent point. However, teams would still have to throw a fourth starter because there would still only be one travel day that falls between games 2 and 3.

 

[Heathbar012]

Or throw their number one on 3 days rest.