All Things MLB Postseason games



Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
You dummy. A shorter series helps the inferior team.

That's also why there should be less teams in a playoff after a 162 game season.
Uh, was I ever indicating that a longer series helps an inferior team? No duh.

My earlier post was with regards to the Giants. Hypothetically, if given the choice would they choose to play the Dodgers NOW in a Best of 5, or take their chances against the lesser the Braves? If they should happen to win they may get the Dodgers and then have to play them in a longer Best of 7, when their rotation might be better set up. Or they could've hoped the Dodgers would have lost to the Brewers.

The context was the discussion on seedling. Everyone, including me, presumed it was a disadvantage for the #1 Giants to draw the team with the 2nd most wins that early. After thinking about other factors, maybe it's not.

Moot point. Current system does not allow it, so be it.

I don't disagree that the fewer playoff teams, the better.
 
Last edited:

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
5,964
Reaction score
3,674
Points
113
So Nellie Cruz hit a ball that didn't travel over the outfield wall nor was an Inside the Parker, but gets credit for a Home Run. Good for him but, weird.

Arozarena, straight steal of home along with Cruz is making it impossible for me to not pull for the Rays. This despite them bringing the term "Opener" into the modern day MLB vernacular.
There first three starters have a combined 26 major league starts and are of course Rookies. Baz, the starter tonight has only three starts SMH @ that amazing organization.
They won 100 games without any pitcher getting more than 10 Ws.
Man are they fun to watch - just a good team.

Randy and Wander have otherworldly talent that it is hard to comprehend.

AND trading for Luplow because he crushes lefties is next level genius!

I could listen to John Smoltz talk baseball forever, man is he good, Great to see Kitty on the call for MLB network's coverage of Astros and Sox - Kitty is amazing as well on the mic.
 



ecoperson

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
508
Reaction score
490
Points
63
There's at least 5 teams in each division now, and doing it over a 162 game schedule (especially with the scheduled intra-division schedule) to me counts for something.

5 teams is only 1 fewer than when Divisions were introduced 1969 (6 each). AL later increased to 7 in 1976 and the NL in 1992.

My concern with using straight wins, however, is that the unbalanced schedule allows playoff teams with more or vastly inferior teams in their division to pad their win totals. I have no doubt that the top teams in the AL East feasted on the Orioles. The Orioles won 20 and lost 56 in the division. When looking at other intra-divisional records, I estimate that each of the other 4 teams padded their win totals by 2-4 wins more than the playoff caliber teams in the other American League divisions. (This includes factoring in that the 4 other teams were all playoff teams or contenders.)

Interestingly, the AL Central was likely the most competitive division in baseball. The last place Twins finished 'only' 20 games back. (The Orioles were 39 games out of 4th place in the East!) Chicago's number of wins was likely lower than it would have been had they been in another division as so many teams in the Central were at least competitive. The last place Twins were 8 games ahead of the next last place team. They finished ahead of 7 other teams overall.

I don't have time to dive into the statistics of it but I would not be an advocate of using straight wins unless the went back to a more balanced schedule where teams play each other across the league equally. The wins just rate out differently based on the competitiveness of the other teams in the division.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
My concern with using straight wins, however, is that the unbalanced schedule allows playoff teams with more or vastly inferior teams in their division to pad their win totals. I have no doubt that the top teams in the AL East feasted on the Orioles. The Orioles won 20 and lost 56 in the division. When looking at other intra-divisional records, I estimate that each of the other 4 teams padded their win totals by 2-4 wins more than the playoff caliber teams in the other American League divisions. (This includes factoring in that the 4 other teams were all playoff teams or contenders.)

Interestingly, the AL Central was likely the most competitive division in baseball. The last place Twins finished 'only' 20 games back. (The Orioles were 39 games out of 4th place in the East!) Chicago's number of wins was likely lower than it would have been had they been in another division as so many teams in the Central were at least competitive. The last place Twins were 8 games ahead of the next last place team. They finished ahead of 7 other teams overall.

I don't have time to dive into the statistics of it but I would not be an advocate of using straight wins unless the went back to a more balanced schedule where teams play each other across the league equally. The wins just rate out differently based on the competitiveness of the other teams in the division.
Fair points on the unbalanced schedules, plus the AL East matched up the weaker NL East in Interleague play this year.

Even in a micro-level, the Giants had a disadvantage playing their Bay rivals the A's extra games while the Dodgers drew the Angels, a bit inferior.

In the end, have to trust it balances out over time even if it's over multiple seasons. Not ideal.
 

GopherVotary

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
715
Points
113
My concern with using straight wins, however, is that the unbalanced schedule allows playoff teams with more or vastly inferior teams in their division to pad their win totals. I have no doubt that the top teams in the AL East feasted on the Orioles. The Orioles won 20 and lost 56 in the division. When looking at other intra-divisional records, I estimate that each of the other 4 teams padded their win totals by 2-4 wins more than the playoff caliber teams in the other American League divisions. (This includes factoring in that the 4 other teams were all playoff teams or contenders.)

Interestingly, the AL Central was likely the most competitive division in baseball. The last place Twins finished 'only' 20 games back. (The Orioles were 39 games out of 4th place in the East!) Chicago's number of wins was likely lower than it would have been had they been in another division as so many teams in the Central were at least competitive. The last place Twins were 8 games ahead of the next last place team. They finished ahead of 7 other teams overall.

I don't have time to dive into the statistics of it but I would not be an advocate of using straight wins unless the went back to a more balanced schedule where teams play each other across the league equally. The wins just rate out differently based on the competitiveness of the other teams in the division.
Despite Baltimore, the AL East had the best combined winning percentage of the six divisions. The AL Central had the second worst, ahead of only the NL East.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
Wow, did the Rays get hosed. 2 run bomb in the bottom of 13 might have won it anyway, but who knows if the inning would have been played differently had they had a 1 run lead.

Have to fix that rule right now.
 



tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,718
Reaction score
2,410
Points
113
Wow, did the Rays get hosed. 2 run bomb in the bottom of 13 might have won it anyway, but who knows if the inning would have been played differently had they had a 1 run lead.

Have to fix that rule right now.
What happened? Didn't see any of it.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
What happened? Didn't see any of it.
Top of 13, 2 outs runner on first going on contact ball hit to RF power alley. Short hops the fence, bounces back, ricochets off the Red Sox outfielder, over the short wall into the bullpen.

Ruled a ground rule double, runner only awarded 3rd, even though he was rounding the base already. Next batter, K. Inning over, no runs.

Bottom of 13, game over.

 
Last edited:

From the Parkinglot

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
853
Points
113
Tonight has been crazy for baseball. Boston is rewarded for playing bad defense but Houston is penalized for trying to throw home from 1st base.

There is no way Grandal did not run intentionally in the grass on that play.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,718
Reaction score
2,410
Points
113
Top of 13, 2 outs runner on first going on contact ball hit to RF power alley. Short hops the fence, bounces back, ricochets off the Red Sox outfielder, over the short wall into the bullpen.

Ruled a ground rule double, runner only awarded 3rd, even though he was rounding the base already. Next batter, K. Inning over, no runs.

Bottom of 13, game over.

Yep. The ground rule double rule has always been iffy.
 



Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
Yep. The ground rule double rule has always been iffy.
This one seems like an easy fix. Ball touches a fielder then goes over the wall, all runners get the base they running to, plus an additional base.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
57,980
Reaction score
13,705
Points
113
Top of 13, 2 outs runner on first going on contact ball hit to RF power alley. Short hops the fence, bounces back, ricochets off the Red Sox outfielder, over the short wall into the bullpen.

Ruled a ground rule double, runner only awarded 3rd, even though he was rounding the base already. Next batter, K. Inning over, no runs.

Bottom of 13, game over.

I hate it in general. Screwed the Twins out of beating the Yankees in game 2 in 2004. Certainly should be umpire's/reviewers discretion in this case. I'd like to see that be in all cases. 90% of the time the runner from 1st would score. Punishing the batter for hitting too hard is dumb.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
I hate it in general. Screwed the Twins out of beating the Yankees in game 2 in 2004. Certainly should be umpire's/reviewers discretion in this case. I'd like to see that be in all cases. 90% of the time the runner from 1st would score. Punishing the batter for hitting too hard is dumb.

Agree.

I would have to think there are fewer ground rule doubles with artificial turf being far less common, but still there should be some leeway for the runners on 1st. With replay they can see if they had made it to 2nd already (pretty much a sure thing with 2 outs) and give them home if so.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
I didn't see much of the Astros/White Sox game but credit due to the Southside fans with the atmosphere/black out. Looked like a fun night to be in New Comiskey, even if the game took 4:27 to play.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
28,324
Reaction score
4,435
Points
113
Wow, did the Rays get hosed. 2 run bomb in the bottom of 13 might have won it anyway, but who knows if the inning would have been played differently had they had a 1 run lead.

Have to fix that rule right now.
It's a horrible rule. Should be an extra base if it goes off a player like that.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
57,980
Reaction score
13,705
Points
113
Agree.

I would have to think there are fewer ground rule doubles with artificial turf being far less common, but still there should be some leeway for the runners on 1st. With replay they can see if they had made it to 2nd already (pretty much a sure thing with 2 outs) and give them home if so.
I'd almost go the other way. Award a runner on 1st home as a default and the other team can challenge if the runner wasn't at least halfway to 3rd when it went out.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
It's a horrible rule. Should be an extra base if it goes off a player like that.

Or they could just build the fence a couple of feet higher, probably too simple of a solution.

I have always wanted to sit down the RF line near the Pesky Pole. I think the fence is 3 feet high there in Fenway.

Side note, even in my 50s, I think I could knock one out of the park there, just fight off an outside fastball and bloop one 297 feet into the corner. Of course the right fielder would have to be lying down, not making an effort to field it. Having a metal bat and a wind blowing out may also be necessary.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
I'd almost go the other way. Award a runner on 1st home as a default and the other team can challenge if the runner wasn't at least halfway to 3rd when it went out.

I don't have a problem with that, when it doubt reward the offense for hitting a ball in play that was not able to be fielded.
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
5,964
Reaction score
3,674
Points
113
How do u not intentionally walk Keke with an open base and avoid pitching to him and put the double play back on the menu when u need to get out of the bottom of the 9 needing 2 outs?
 




Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
Tonight Thursday, for the 3rd time the Giants-Dodgers meet up in a winner take all game of a Playoff Series. Everyone always remembers 1951 Bobby Thomson's "Shot Heard 'Round the World" (NY vs BRO), but they also faced off in 1962 (SF vs LA).

Again the Giants rallied in the 9th (this time the top of the inning) to win 6-4 and take the Best of 3. Winning pitcher, none other than Don Larsen who came in relief, previously known for his perfecto as a Yankee against the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1956.
 
Last edited:

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,718
Reaction score
2,410
Points
113
Tonight, for the 3rd time the Giants-Dodgers meet up in a winner take all game of a Playoff Series. Everyone always remembers 1951 Bobby Thomson's "Shot Heard 'Round the World" (NY vs BRO), but they also faced off in 1962 (SF vs LA).

Again the Giants rallied in the 9th (this time the top of the inning) to win 6-4 and take the Best of 3. Winning pitcher, none other than Don Larsen who came in relief, previously known for his perfecto as a Yankee against the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1956.
Might be time for Magic Johnson to invite this guy for a pep-talk.
1634142927265.jpeg
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,713
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
Might be time for Magic Johnson to invite this guy for a pep-talk.
View attachment 14773
Not really a fond memory for me, though nothing to do with Gibson nor the Dodgers. I was sick as a dog watching that game. Same day as Miami (Fla) vs Notre Dame (aka Catholics vs Convicts).

Missed a lot of both contests while barfing and sleeping, fortunately not simultaneously. Too much information.
 
Last edited:

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
5,964
Reaction score
3,674
Points
113
Tonight, for the 3rd time the Giants-Dodgers meet up in a winner take all game of a Playoff Series. Everyone always remembers 1951 Bobby Thomson's "Shot Heard 'Round the World" (NY vs BRO), but they also faced off in 1962 (SF vs LA).

Again the Giants rallied in the 9th (this time the top of the inning) to win 6-4 and take the Best of 3. Winning pitcher, none other than Don Larsen who came in relief, previously known for his perfecto as a Yankee against the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1956.
Travel day. It's on Thursday
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,718
Reaction score
2,410
Points
113
Not really a fond memory for me, though nothing to do with Gibson nor the Dodgers. I was sick as a dog watching that game. Same day as Miami (Fla) vs Notre Dame (aka Catholics vs Convicts).

Missed a lot of both contests while barfing and sleeping, fortunately not simultaneously. Too much information.
One of my fondest sports memories by far. No puking involved.
 




Top Bottom