ML Baseball 2005 discussion thread (1 Viewer)

[BobbyPerry]

I love listening to Miller. I've always thought he was great, and I have to admit I admire Morgan for the way he played the game. Well, after weekend, it looks like the Nats are still in it, hanging in there. It would be cool to see them come out of nowehere and win the wild card. If it happens, it'd be too bad noone in DC would be able to see it happen.

 

[Andrew Pezzo]

Yanks back on top in the AL East - its a happy day. Of course last time the Yanks were in first it only lasted a day. The way things are shaping up that series with the Sox the last weekend could determine the final playoff spot. And its very possible the "World Champ" Sox may not even make the playoffs. Sure is going to be a fun and exciting end to the season (its just about all the divisions).

 

[Jason Seaver]

Oh, sure, now you show up.

 

[Andrew Pezzo]

I know, my timing is a bit off but since Feburary I have been having a terrible year. Now that something good is happening I needed to share. :b

 

[Haggai]

The possible one-game playoff scenarios in the AL are summarized in this excerpt from an MLB.com story, with some wording adjustments I made to try to make it more clear:


Current records:

New York 94-65
Boston 93-66

Chicago 96-63
Cleveland 93-66

So if Cleveland sweeps Chicago, they would both end up at 96-66, but since only one of Boston and NY will end the season with at least 96 wins, both Cleveland and Chicago would be guaranteed playoff spots. So, instead of having a 1-game playoff between them to determine which of them wins the division and which of them gets the wild card, Chicago would simply win the division based on head-to-head (they would win the season series 11-8, in this scenario).

But if Boston wins 2 out of 3 to tie NY at 95-67, they MIGHT have a one-game playoff for the division title--even though NY would have won the season series 10-9--IF Cleveland ALSO finishes with at least 95 wins (they would need to win at least 2 out of 3 against Chicago this weekend for that).

So if Boston and NY end up tied with 95 wins (i.e. the Red Sox win 2 out of 3 this weekend), the possible tie-breaker scenarios appear to be:

(1a) If Cleveland has 96 wins, they're the wild card team, and NY and Boston play a sudden-death one-game playoff: the winner's in, the loser's season is over.

(1b) If Cleveland has 95 wins, the loser of the NY-Boston playoff game THEN plays CLEVELAND for the wild-card.

(1c) If Cleveland has 93 or 94 wins, NY and Boston DO NOT play a one-game playoff. NY would win the division by virtue of winning the season series, while Boston would get the wild-card.

Also, it's possible that NY or Boston could lose the division straight-up AND tie with Cleveland for the wild card, in which case those two teams would just play one game for the wild card slot.

Whew!

 

[Joseph S]

4 games to watch Saturday and last weekend MLB allowed Fox to steal the other games into a "National Blackout" which means you can only see 1 of them.

Call early and often to get blackout lifted on MLBEI and MLB.tv:
Phone: (212) 931-7800
The Office of the Commissioner of Baseball
Allan H. (Bud) Selig, Commissioner
245 Park Avenue, 31st Floor
New York, NY 10167

 

[Kevin Hewell]

No huzzahs for the Braves' 14th consecutive division title? No matter what you think of the franchise you gotta give it up to Bobby Cox for fielding a great team year after year.

 

[Jason Seaver]

11th. Montreal's great 1994 doesn't deserve to be completely ignored.

 

[Patrick_S]

Great run but it still adds up to one LESS World Series title then the Marlins in the same span of time.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I think you have to view the Braves streak as them being very good at the marathon, but are at the mercy of the hottest teams in October in a sprint (who probably had no business being in the chase for the World Series except for the creation of the Wild Card to get into the playoffs, i.e. the Marlins). A lot of people probably can't even remember a time when there were not Divisional Play-off games, only League championship games and the World Series games in the playoffs. The "best out of 5 games" format for the Divisional series gives the hotter team with 2 big gun pitchers an advantage over a team that's built to win over a long haul. The longer "best out of 7 games" format for the LCS gives a team built to win in the long haul a better chance to prove it by exposing the quality of teams' 3rd and/or 4th starters in the playoff series.

I heard a suggestion for the Wild card that would make that play-off position slightly "fairer" by eliminating any and all home games for the wild card team in the play-offs. If the wild card team can win out on the road, they deserve the championship. (This parallels the NFL play-off system, of course).

Not every team will win each time they get to the World Series, and the Braves have been there 5 times during their streak, which is still an honorable feat in itself as well. But actually they got to the World Series 5 times, in between 1991 to 1999, which isn't a bad resume, and only 2 other teams during that stretch could claim a better one with multiple championships (Toronto, and New York Yankees).

The Yankees deserves all the accolades for cashing in on their World Series appearances in the past 10 years (and since we are making snide remarks, their bloated payroll does make me roll my eyes at the "fairness" aspect of such gross outlay to buy championships).

To make the "Well, the Marlins have 2 championships, while the Braves only have one" argument, it becomes an issue of whether the glass is half-full or half-empty in your world view. Some fans would prefer to just win the whole enchilada when their team in in the playoffs, and suffer through some/many non-play-off seasons; other fans would want their chance to have a shot at the championship each year, and that means making the play-offs on a consistent (can't win if you aren't in the play-offs). I have no problems if you'd rather suffer through some bad times to have really good times because I'm okay with having a team that somehow finds a way to win their division 14 straight times (not backdooring with a wild card spot, either), even in a year with some fiscal restraint, and boatload of rookies, and some good returning veterans in the lineup.

 

[Shane Martin]

You could also view it this way

The "Better" long haul team choked in the playoffs under the durress of something mattering. When the goings get tough, the tough get going. The Braves have NO excuses for such play in the playoffs when it REALLY matters. People care about championship teams not teams just being good.. The issue really falls back on the players and not the management. You can't fault Bobby Cox.

Let's face it, great teams finish and are known for championships. Teams that make it there and blow it are not. You should beat Wildcard teams. No excuses.

 

[Patrick_S]

Very well said. The reality is that the Braves are the embodiment of the term "Sunshine Cowboys".

I would disagree with the idea that it’s not Cox’s fault. Cox is just like LaRussa in that they seem to get the most out of their teams during the season but somehow can not get their teams over the top when everything is on the line.

As for the diatribe concerning the Wildcard, it’s part of the game and that is all there is to say about it. I’m certain that Marlin fans don’t care how they got there because World Championships are all that matter in Professional Sports.

 

[Jason Seaver]

"The NFL does it this way" strikes me as a reason not to do things. Besides, that'd be a cruddy thing to do to a playoff team's fans - especially if they're a team like the Red Sox this year, a Wild Card for seeding purposes only.

My favorite way of handling it would be the top 2 non-division leaders have a one-game playoff. Not sure how it would work with this year's situation, but it would make winning to division much more important.

 

[Shane Martin]

But in the end, the players have to play. I can't blame that on Cox. If a managing decision caused him to lose, then OK I'll give you that.

 

[Patrick_S]

Yes of course in the end most of the fault is with the players. I just find it interesting that for some reason Cox just can't keep his teams motivated enough to give that little extra it takes to win it all.

 

[Joseph S]

When did this rule change? In 1995, there was nearly a situation where Seattle and Anaheim would have had the same record as the the Yanks or ?? after 162 games. However, since they needed a playoff game for the division the loser would be out completely because their record would then include one more loss and thus 1/2 game behind the 3rd team with the same record after 162 games.

While that isn't fair, the whole thing with Chicago and Yankees winning or having it wrapped up by technicalities is a joke and should be gone as well. Home field is important and it shouldn't be determined by a won/loss record during the season. It's an even bigger issue in season where not all teams play an equal number against each other home/away anymore. Coin flips are equally bogus for decisions for winners.

In case you don't know, the "double everyone else's payroll" Yankees still haven't won this entire millennium.

 

[Shane Martin]

Are you kidding?

 

[Jason Seaver]

I think the rule changed a couple years ago after one of those three-way ties - a team that was tied for the division lead didn't advance past a one-game playoff because a second place team in another division had the same record. That satisfied no-one, so they tweaked the rules.

The way I figure it, the Sox and Yankees tied for the AL East and the head-to-head record just determined seeding. If I were in charge or raising flags at Fenway, "AL East Champion" would be what goes up in April, barring the opportunity to use "AL Champion" or "World Series Champion".

 

[Patrick Sun]

Please continue the playoff discussion in this thread:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...hreadid=243349

Discussion on the awards, and other regular season discussion should remain in this thread. Thanks.

 

[Shane Martin]

Didn't take long for some firings(mutual decisions) to happen.

The Dodgers let go Jim Tracy. Idiotic move by the management. Rumors are that he is headed east. I've heard Pittsburg. Would Jack McKeon want to head west?

And the Tigers let go of Alan Trammell. They are talking to Jim Leyland.