What's new

ML Baseball 2005 discussion thread (1 Viewer)

Joseph S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 23, 1999
Messages
2,862
No. It should be decided on the field in a playoff. The entire scenario where the White Sox wrapped up the division when they were three up with three to go is absurd. Same is true with saying the Yankees are "division winners" when they have the exact same record as the Red Sox.

The Red Sox, Angels, and Yankees all have the same regular season record. If you want to go by these silly rules then the Red Sox should have Home Field against the Angels in the ALCS because they had same regular season record and the Red Sox won the season series with the Angels 6-4. Makes no sense otherwise That's why divisions should be won on the field to avoid this garbage.
 

Rick Deschaine

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 29, 2000
Messages
193
The reason for the Red Sox and Yankees for not having a 1 game playoff is because they both have made the post season. You only have a playoff game if an actual playoff berth is at stake, not a seeding issue for home field advantage.

Do you really think that the Red Sox and Yankees would 1: want to use a good pitcher up just prior starting they're respective playoff series and 2: actually play another game (with no day off I may add) to wear down their players, bullpen and a selected starting pitcher? I don't think so!

To me home field advantage isn't that important, it's more important to be the best prepared you can be for the first playoff series. In the case of the Red Sox, I would not want to have no day off and use up one of their starting pitchers (considering their pitching situation to begin with) going into a series with the team that has the best ERA in the American League who will in fact have a day off.

Both teams are in the playoffs, so they don't need a playoff game. Period.

Later, Rick
 

Joseph S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 23, 1999
Messages
2,862
That's been the case for... 1 year? 2 years? It's nothing more than a POS rule added for FOX and not for the baseball fans. The same FOX that RESCHEDULED AND THEN BLACKED OUT 3 of 4 games on the second to last day of the season.

Winning the division has been done on the field for years and I don't see a reason for it to change. With the division title comes the benefit of home field advantage for up to two series. The fact that teams knew they didn't have to fight for the division affected both the AL East (Yankees sat Mussina) and the AL Central (Guillen benched his starters for the first game) even though in both cases each team could still be tied with another division rival.
 

Rick Deschaine

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 29, 2000
Messages
193


The Yankees don't even have home field advantage the first round of the play-offs even though they won their division. If it's so important for teams to get home field advantage, why didn't the Yankeees start Mussina instead of Wright to make that attempt? They wanted to rest up!

The bottom line, real Major League managers know what's important when it comes to the end of the season. Having a well rested lineup and avaiable pitchers are more important than home field advantage. If you take a poll with all the manager's in baseball, I'm sure they'll agree with my logic and not your's. I can't imagine any of them would want to play a 1 game playoff if they're already in the play-offs.

The bottom line is, I'm happy the Red Sox are in the play-offs.

I'm happy they didn't have to play a 1 game playoff. The won it all last year with the same scenario (being the wild card that is).

I'm not happy that their team ERA is a full half point higher than it was last year. This illustrates how importatnt it is for them to have every advantage they can get pitching wise.

I'm happy that they didn't waste a starting pitcher to get home field advantage who then might not be available against the White Sox.

If you think any manager would like to waste that pitcher than your crazy. As I said before, Francona was very happy they didn't have to have that playoff game and I'm sure Torre felt the same.

Later, Rick
 

Joseph S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 23, 1999
Messages
2,862
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/ne...=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Rule didn't come into play until Sept of 2003. Typical Selig behavior.

Who makes rule changes after the games have been played? He does. You know why?, he still didn't have a tie breaker rule if there was a 4 way tie and it was a possibility in 2003 even though the wild card became a reality some 8 years prior in 1995.

In the spring of 2002, the owners actually passed a recommendation that playoff game continue but result not classified as game #163. Of course Bud $elig did nothing and we almost had Cleveland getting in over Oak/Sea because of his lack of action later that year. Nothing happened in the aftermath of it either. It took the liklihood of a 4 way tie for this joke of a rule to be instituted against the recommendation of the owners who wanted the playoff game to decide.
 

Rick Deschaine

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 29, 2000
Messages
193
OK,

I stand corrected. But I don't think it's necessarily a bad rule for the aforementioned reasons. I too would have liked the Red Sox to have a chance at home field advantage throughout the playoffs, but I wouldn't have liked them to have a playoff game just for that purpose with no day off before the playoffs start. It doesn't make sense from a manager's point of view.

Rick
 

BrettGallman

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 11, 2002
Messages
1,392
Real Name
Brett
I'll agree with Joseph. The AL East absolutely should have been decided on the field, and actually would have had Cleveland won 2 games. It's absurd that a team in another whole division can affect that race. So what if the two teams won't be rested? That's just how it goes. And it's not just a simple as determining seeding. Last I checked, a Division title was a pretty big deal, or maybe that's just me. Hell, my favorite team has one 14 straight and it's still a big deal to me. I'd be pretty pissed if the Braves' streak ended because of a tie-breaker.
 

Jason Seaver

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
9,303
11 straight. :)

I think it is rather absurd that this tie-breaker only comes into effect if some third team isn't affected. But, honestly, I don't see the gain for a one-game playoff in this situation, just to determine where games will be played rather than by whom. (Although I imagine some tickets and hot dogs could have been sold) It'd make much more sense to me to say Boston and New York tied for the division and thus there was no Wild Card, but you know what? Five years from now, I'll look in a baseball almanac, see the standings, and not bother to read the fine print underneath.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,701
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top