Better Off With 6 Seed Than 5 Seed

[king koji]

The fundamental flaw in MLB's Playoff system is apparent, due to not re-seeding after each round a la NFL.

If we win  today and "earn" the 5-seed we have to play better win percentage NYY/Tor rather than worse percentage Det/Cle if we lose and get the 6-seed.

This is THEN followed by having to play better win percentage 1-seed Tor/NYY than worse percentage 2-seed Seattle in the Division Round..

The ONLY possible advantage to being a 5 over a 6 that I can see is if these 2 teams get to the ALCS Final. Then you'd be glad to have home field in a 7-game series. Seemingly a small chance of this happening though and not enough of a gain to overcome the advantage of getting to play two "lesser" teams on the way up the ladder.

I would actually call this a serious problem for MLB.

Anyways, in my view,, as today goes, LOSE BABY LOSE!

[dgalehouse]

4 hours ago, king koji said:

The fundamental flaw in MLB's Playoff system is apparent, due to not re-seeding after each round a la NFL.

If we win  today and "earn" the 5-seed we have to play better win percentage NYY/Tor rather than worse percentage Det/Cle if we lose and get the 6-seed.

This is THEN followed by having to play better win percentage 1-seed Tor/NYY than worse percentage 2-seed Seattle in the Division Round..

The ONLY possible advantage to being a 5 over a 6 that I can see is if these 2 teams get to the ALCS Final. Then you'd be glad to have home field in a 7-game series. Seemingly a small chance of this happening though and not enough of a gain to overcome the advantage of getting to play two "lesser" teams on the way up the ladder.

I would actually call this a serious problem for MLB.

Anyways, in my view,, as today goes, LOSE BABY LOSE!

It leads to suspicion that teams might intentionally dump games to obtain what they feel is a more favorable playoff position. This is something that the gamblers would certainly pick up on.  And anything that casts doubt on the integrity of the games is obviously bad for the sport. 

[notin]

If you play a game, you play to win.

 

[moonslav59]

The bigger flaw is giving division winners a higher initial seed that teams with better records.

The playoffs should be seeded by record.

1. TOR or NYY vs winner of 4-5 seeds.

2. NYY or TOR vs winner of 3 (SEA)-6 seeds.

TOR and NYY earned the two best records by being the two best team. They played in the toughest division against tougher opponents.

[Old Red]

46 minutes ago, notin said:

If you play a game, you play to win.

 

👍👍👍.

[notin]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

👍👍👍.

I should point out I’d still pull Giolito from the start today and instead start Payton Tolle.  Not trying to lose, but setting up the rotation for the postseason is a consideration as well…

[Old Red]

7 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

The bigger flaw is giving division winners a higher initial seed that teams with better records.

The playoffs should be seeded by record.

1. TOR or NYY vs winner of 4-5 seeds.

2. NYY or TOR vs winner of 3 (SEA)-6 seeds.

TOR and NYY earned the two best records by being the two best team. They played in the toughest division against tougher opponents.

As long as teams play the same schedule I’ve always been for doing away with divisions completely, and go by records to rank them, but having divisions like in all sports you frequently get division winners with a worse record than 2nd, or 3rd place teams in another division.

[moonslav59]

Just now, notin said:

I should point out I’d still pull Giolito from the start today and instead start Payton Tolle.  Not trying to lose, but setting up the rotation for the postseason is a consideration as well…

Yes, the players do their best to win every game, but not the manager- in this specific case.

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, notin said:

I should point out I’d still pull Giolito from the start today and instead start Payton Tolle.  Not trying to lose, but setting up the rotation for the postseason is a consideration as well…

I’ve always looked at it if something is riding on with the team you are playing just like if it was the other way around for the Red Sox.

[moonslav59]

Just now, Old Red said:

As long as teams play the same schedule I’ve always been for doing away with divisions completely, and go by records to rank them, but having divisions like in all sports you frequently get division winners with a worse record than 2nd, or 3rd place teams in another division.

But they will never ever play the exact same schedules.

That would mean...

5 games vs 29 teams=145 schedule

or

6 games vs 29 teams=174 schedule

[notin]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I’ve always looked at it if something is riding on with the team you are playing just like if it was the other way around for the Red Sox.

Fair.

Of course other teams rarely show that consideration, some even when expecting it…

[Old Red]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

But they will never ever play the exact same schedules.

That would mean...

5 games vs 29 teams=145 schedule

or

6 games vs 29 teams=174 schedule

I get that point, but you could get it fairly close to what it is now. Other wise you are always going to have some divisions tougher than other divisions, and the seedlings will come out as you stated today. Nothing was like 1967 with 4 teams were fighting for 1 spot, and it came down to the very last game for the Red Sox to find out they were going to the WS.

[Old Red]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

Fair.

Of course other teams rarely show that consideration, some even when expecting it…

Agree.

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, Old Red said:

I get that point, but you could get it fairly close to what it is now. Other wise you are always going to have some divisions tougher than other divisions, and the seedlings will come out as you stated today. Nothing was like 1967 with 4 teams were fighting for 1 spot, and it came down to the very last game for the Red Sox to find out they were going to the WS.

Agreed, and as long as we have an AL-NL, there could be a way to devise an equal schedule within each league:

4 games vs each team in other league: 4 x 15 teams=60 games

7 games vs own league teams: 7 x 14=98 games

158 games

or

3 games vs each team in other league: 3 x 15=45 games

8 games vs each team in own league: 8 x 14=112 gams

167 game schedule

or

2 games vs each other league team: 30 games

9 games vs own league teams: 126 games

156 games

At least each team in each league plays the same schedule as each other.

[Old Red]

8 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Agreed, and as long as we have an AL-NL, there could be a way to devise an equal schedule within each league:

4 games vs each team in other league: 4 x 15 teams=60 games

7 games vs own league teams: 7 x 14=98 games

158 games

or

3 games vs each team in other league: 3 x 15=45 games

8 games vs each team in own league: 8 x 14=112 gams

167 game schedule

or

2 games vs each other league team: 30 games

9 games vs own league teams: 126 games

156 games

At least each team in each league plays the same schedule as each other.

Sounds good to me.

[moonslav59]

If we ever see a 32 team MLB, it would open several options:

Two 16 team leagues:

3 games vs 16 teams from other league: 3 x 16=48 games

7 games vs 15 teams in own league: 7 x 15=105 games

153 game season (if you played 8 vs own league, if would be a 168 game season)

The 153 game season would allow for longer playoffs with 8 teams making it from each league. You could also have longer series to add more revenue and more high stakes games. (Four 7 game series to win a WS, or maybe the first round 5 games.)

Or go to four 8 team divisions and unbalanced schedules with the same issues we have today.

3 games vs other league (3 x 16=48)

6 games vs other division (6 x 8=48)

9 games vs own division (9 x 7=63)

159 game schedule

[dgalehouse]

1 hour ago, notin said:

I should point out I’d still pull Giolito from the start today and instead start Payton Tolle.  Not trying to lose, but setting up the rotation for the postseason is a consideration as well…

No one could reasonably expect Cora to use Giolito today.  But Jose DeLeon??? Really?   Is that trying to win?

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

If we ever see a 32 team MLB, it would open several options:

Two 16 team leagues:

3 games vs 16 teams from other league: 3 x 16=48 games

7 games vs 15 teams in own league: 7 x 15=105 games

153 game season (if you played 8 vs own league, if would be a 168 game season)

The 153 game season would allow for longer playoffs with 8 teams making it from each league. You could also have longer series to add more revenue and more high stakes games. (Four 7 game series to win a WS, or maybe the first round 5 games.)

Or go to four 8 team divisions and unbalanced schedules with the same issues we have today.

3 games vs other league (3 x 16=48)

6 games vs other division (6 x 8=48)

9 games vs own division (9 x 7=63)

159 game schedule

Why 32 teams? MLB is watered down enough. If anything, the league should have a reduction in teams, which will never happen.

Why 32 teams? Money of course. The one true god.

[illinoisredsox]

34 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

No one could reasonably expect Cora to use Giolito today.  But Jose DeLeon??? Really?   Is that trying to win?

Who do you propose to use instead?  

Harrison pitched Friday.  Early pitched yesterday.  Tolle is now a reliever.  Even a bullpen game isn’t a great idea.

Neither team is taking this game all that seriously.

[dgalehouse]

1 minute ago, illinoisredsox said:

Who do you propose to use instead?  

Harrison pitched Friday.  Early pitched yesterday.  Tolle is now a reliever.  Even a bullpen game isn’t a great idea.

Neither team is taking this game all that seriously.

DeLeon is arguably the worst pitcher in the organization. This looks like an attempt to lose this game, perhaps to get the sixth seed , as has been discussed before. It is not a good look no matter how you may try to justify it. 

[moonslav59]

16 minutes ago, SPLENDIDSPLINTER said:

Why 32 teams? MLB is watered down enough. If anything, the league should have a reduction in teams, which will never happen.

Why 32 teams? Money of course. The one true god.

Yes. I'm not for 32 teams, but the money is a big lure.

I think 32 would help them justify going to a 16 team playoff structure and you got it.... more money!

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

DeLeon is arguably the worst pitcher in the organization. This looks like an attempt to lose this game, perhaps to get the sixth seed , as has been discussed before. It is not a good look no matter how you may try to justify it. 

Is Drohan, Jack Anderson of Isaac Coffey any better? Clearly better?

[dgalehouse]

8 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Is Drohan, Jack Anderson of Isaac Coffey any better? Clearly better?

I don't know.. I don't care.  Check out DeLeon's numbers in AAA. The point is; is it acceptable to try to lose a game in order to get a lower seed . Notin replied that you should play to win. I agree with that. 

[king koji]

1 hour ago, dgalehouse said:

No one could reasonably expect Cora to use Giolito today.  But Jose DeLeon??? Really?   Is that trying to win?

That's the whole POINT! See original post.

[dgalehouse]

22 minutes ago, king koji said:

That's the whole POINT! See original post.

I saw the original post. I replied to it. To me, using DeLeon to start today's game looks suspiciously like an attempt to lose and get the lower seed. Perhaps to play the wild card series against the weaker Central Division champ. I can't say that for sure, but it certainly is not a good look. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

18 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

I saw the original post. I replied to it. To me, using DeLeon to start today's game looks suspiciously like an attempt to lose and get the lower seed. Perhaps to play the wild card series against the weaker Central Division champ. I can't say that for sure, but it certainly is not a good look. 

The org may have simply decided the most difficult way to win a Wild Card series is to play three games in the Bronx, and the easiest may be in Cleveland, since the Guards have the AL's worst offense, and the Sox' strength is clearly pitching. 

If the Red Sox have to play the Yankees, they certainly would like a longer series later in the postseason with some games guaranteed to take place in Boston.  They're still trying to win it all by trying to choose that path.

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, dgalehouse said:

I don't know.. I don't care.  Check out DeLeon's numbers in AAA. The point is; is it acceptable to try to lose a game in order to get a lower seed . Notin replied that you should play to win. I agree with that. 

We need Gio to start a playoff game. That is a no brainer.

We start De Leon and try to win.

[illinoisredsox]

37 minutes ago, dgalehouse said:

I saw the original post. I replied to it. To me, using DeLeon to start today's game looks suspiciously like an attempt to lose and get the lower seed. Perhaps to play the wild card series against the weaker Central Division champ. I can't say that for sure, but it certainly is not a good look. 

So you would have used Giolito since it’s his turn, thereby burning him for the wild card series?

That would be a good look, but an eminently stupid thing to do.

Who would you have pitched today?

[Beaneater]

11 hours ago, king koji said:

The fundamental flaw in MLB's Playoff system is apparent, due to not re-seeding after each round a la NFL.

If we win  today and "earn" the 5-seed we have to play better win percentage NYY/Tor rather than worse percentage Det/Cle if we lose and get the 6-seed.

This is THEN followed by having to play better win percentage 1-seed Tor/NYY than worse percentage 2-seed Seattle in the Division Round..

The ONLY possible advantage to being a 5 over a 6 that I can see is if these 2 teams get to the ALCS Final. Then you'd be glad to have home field in a 7-game series. Seemingly a small chance of this happening though and not enough of a gain to overcome the advantage of getting to play two "lesser" teams on the way up the ladder.

I would actually call this a serious problem for MLB.

Anyways, in my view,, as today goes, LOSE BABY LOSE!

Agree. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a series in Cleveland. Sure, we might get our butts handed to us-- that's always a possibility. But every other possibility seems significantly more formidable.

[notin]

2 hours ago, SPLENDIDSPLINTER said:

Why 32 teams? MLB is watered down enough. If anything, the league should have a reduction in teams, which will never happen.

Why 32 teams? Money of course. The one true god.

Plus with 32 teams, everyone can make the postseason in a nice, easily bracketable format…