tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post7399382143402418968..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: Friday Baseball PostJonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-22257270805547215432010-08-21T17:27:02.590-05:002010-08-21T17:27:02.590-05:00I don't mind the two divisions/both first plac...I don't mind the two divisions/both first place teams/bioth second place teams go to the playoffs and then each first plays the opposite second in each league. <br /><br />But I think just a straight seven-game series in each round makes more sense and would be more acceptable. <br /><br />You might still (especially if the current AL East is all in one division) get one third-place team screwed, based on won/lost, but tough beans.efgoldmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-33778315958568298162010-08-21T12:02:56.426-05:002010-08-21T12:02:56.426-05:00WC, WS..... As you can see, I'm not really tha...WC, WS..... As you can see, I'm not really that familiar with the postseason. Comes from being a lifelong Cubs fan.Jeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-36502353950730274702010-08-21T11:08:03.772-05:002010-08-21T11:08:03.772-05:00I agree that promotion/relegation isn't going ...I agree that promotion/relegation isn't going to happen.<br /><br />As far as leaving money on the table...you could always go to a first to 4 wins/first to 3 wins setup to get back those games. <br /><br />Yeah, multiple races takes something away from it no matter what, but we had plenty of great and memorable ones during 1969-1993, and I think under my proposal we'd be close to that, although it wouldn't be quite the same.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-16297474591536676072010-08-21T10:45:48.407-05:002010-08-21T10:45:48.407-05:00I'm a Cubs fan, so my team's 34% of the wa...I'm a Cubs fan, so my team's 34% of the way into a second lifetime without winning it all.<br /><br />I'm not a huge fan of relegation schemes, though yours is the best one I've seen. It comes down to taste, but I like the idea of a stable stable of franchises in a league. Also, people would throw fits if a traditional team (Cubs, Yankees, Red Sox) got relegated.<br /><br />As to your main proposal...I think just allowing division winner to play all of the games at home would make the LDS a 57/43 proposition which is closer to the advantage I would think would be fair. But, probably not enough to create a pennant race. Again, a matter of taste.<br /><br />I know you're not concerned with the details and I don't have time to do the math, but it would seem like allowing the division winners to win only 2 games might overshoot the mark a bit. And it would cut off a few of the potential combinations that currently exist for the WC: WLWLW, WWLLW, LWWLL, LLWWW, WLLWW, LWLWW. Those games 4 and 5 you're missing are real money.<br /><br />The real problem is that only the original pennant races are enough to make it feel special. Approximating it is great, but it'll never really be as special when there are 7 other playoff teams.Some Guynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-78662335610947487552010-08-21T10:08:13.194-05:002010-08-21T10:08:13.194-05:00Some Guy,
Sounds OK to me. I have no doubt that ...Some Guy,<br /><br />Sounds OK to me. I have no doubt that there are enough players and fans to support 40 teams, but I do think that large leagues do have their problems...it means that the average team wins it all every 40 years, which means that a lot of teams won't win it all in the lifetime of their fans. <br /><br />If we really wanted pie-in-the-sky stuff, what I'd think about is to return to the 1969-1976 24 teams, four six team divisions, with a free 24 team AAA high minors and promotion/relegation. I'm not certain that I like it better, and I'm not certain that you could figure out a way to really make it work, but it has a lot of advantages.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-49531592496631950282010-08-21T09:27:29.040-05:002010-08-21T09:27:29.040-05:00Since yours'll never happen, I'll stump fo...Since yours'll never happen, I'll stump for my solution that'll never happen...<br /><br />Expand to 40 teams. Add teams in Montreal, third & fourth teams in NY, a third in the Chicago suburbs (Naperville?), a third Texas team, Portland, Memphis, Salt Lake City, a Mexican team and another Midwestern or 3rd Canadian team. <br /><br />The ultimate goal would be eight five team divisions. Under that scenario, the first place teams would be roughly equivalent to division winners we see today. <br /><br />To prevent a massive shock, it could be phased in at two teams added every two years. That intervening time could be used to experiment with different formats(8 four team divisions, 4 nine team divisions, etc.).<br /><br />For those who'd say, "TALENT DILUTION!!!!" Well, talent dilution would be a good thing. The 320 players added to MLB would be good enough to make a MLB roster at just about every point in its history.Some Guynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-56450873561183083932010-08-21T08:40:09.144-05:002010-08-21T08:40:09.144-05:00"I think the problem with the model you'r..."I think the problem with the model you're describing is that fans would have a hard time accepting a big imbalance built into a given series, like one team needing fewer wins than the other or getting to play all the games at home."<br /><br />I agree with Jeff, except as to getting to play all the games at home. I think this is an excellent reward for finishing first, and would not seem unfair, particularly if you are contemplating a five game series for this round.<br /><br />PS. I still haven't forgiven Bill Madlock or the umpiring crew for the illegal slide that injured Fernandez and was probably most responsible for Tigers catching the JaysJohnny canucknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-18713081961874464132010-08-21T03:04:47.858-05:002010-08-21T03:04:47.858-05:00I believe WC means "wild card."
I actua...I believe WC means "wild card."<br /><br />I actually like this proposed two-division setup. My only difference with Johnathon is that I'm more of a fan of interleague play. In fact, I think every team should play one three-game series per year against each team in the other league. It's bizarre that baseball has the longest season of any major sport but doesn't have every team play every other team every year. Talk about not taking advantage of your long season.<br /><br />Of course, this kind of expanded interleague play leaves fewer in-league games, but it's still possible to play an unbalanced schedule, albeit not as unbalanced as the old days. However, this would probably be an advantage in selling the system to the owners. Specifically, the stakes won't be as high in the fight to determine which east-of-the-Mississippi NL team goes to the Western division if the split in league games is approximately 10-6 for division teams vs. non-division teams, as opposed to the 20-6 proposed unbalanced schedule that made the Cubs fight tooth and nail against Faye Vincent's realignment scheme.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-863034423513837332010-08-21T02:13:42.768-05:002010-08-21T02:13:42.768-05:00By "WC," do you mean World Series? (Not ...By "WC," do you mean World Series? (Not "West Coast," I take it.) Or maybe "World Ceres"? Interesting bit of Latin there.Jeffnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-28897986453635596082010-08-21T00:11:09.172-05:002010-08-21T00:11:09.172-05:00Jeff,
I'm confident that if they implemented ...Jeff,<br /><br />I'm confident that if they implemented it, people would get used to it pretty rapidly. No question, the first time that a 90-72 first place team got a seeding advantage over a 98-64 second place team from the other division, you would hear a lot of complaints...and then people would get over it.<br /><br />BTW, I forgot to mention one of the other advantages of my system: teams competing for a playoff spot would be playing the same schedule, or at least real close (assuming that we can't get rid of interleague). You would certainly keep the unbalanced schedule, which would (with 8 or 7 team divisions) be the bulk of each team's schedule...probably one home & away series each with the other division, with the handful of interleague games the only difference between two same-division teams' schedule. That compares very nicely to today's system, in which significant strength-of-schedule differences exist between WC rivals. It also, of course, would mean that we wouldn't really know whether the 98 win team was better than the 92 win team from the other division, not that that will help things much. But no one thought it was unfair that whoever finished 2nd in the NL West in 1973 had to stay home...people are pretty willing to accept various different systems.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-33886635408318178252010-08-20T23:51:25.493-05:002010-08-20T23:51:25.493-05:00What do Bobby Thomson, Bucky Dent and the 1993 Bra...What do Bobby Thomson, Bucky Dent and the 1993 Braves have in common? All three were the culmination of a desperate, August/September charge from 10+ back to win a pennant/division.<br /><br />Is the massive charge from way back the reason those races are the most memorable? Detroit/Toronto '87 was a great finish, and IIRC Toronto was ahead most of the season, but nothing like the '51 Dodgers/'78 Sox/'93 Giants.<br /><br />One of the positives of the proposal is that it returns that mano-a-mano feel of those great playoff chases (in contrast to the current situation where wild cards are realistically contested by a half-dozen non-descript teams per league in mid-August).<br /><br />However, too much imbalance in the "wild card" (quarterfinal) may diminish the appeal of those desperate pennant chases. The fact that the baseball playoffs are essentially a lottery, with 83-win Cardinal or 85-win Twin teams as respectable world champions, may make those late season races more interesting - just getting to the playoffs pretty much puts you on equal footing for being champion. Putting too many barriers up for a particular class of playoff team may make those late season chases less exciting.CSHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-73120367780162150182010-08-20T23:13:35.838-05:002010-08-20T23:13:35.838-05:00Yeah, as a Cubs fan, I think of 1908 too. Except t...Yeah, as a Cubs fan, I think of 1908 too. Except the thought process unfortunately stops there. :-/<br /><br />(As David Letterman once said, one of the top ten reasons the Cubs haven't won the World Series since then is that "conferences on the mound quickly degenerate into reminiscing about that great 1908 team." But I digress.)<br /><br />I think the problem with the model you're describing is that fans would have a hard time accepting a big imbalance built into a given series, like one team needing fewer wins than the other or getting to play all the games at home. I mean, you could extend such logic and say that one team gets an extra fielder or a fourth out every inning, but I think there'd be a fan revolt. I could be wrong, but I think fans instinctively feel that once teams are facing each other mano-a-mano (whatever formula put them there), the playing field should be level, as it were, at least for the duration of that encounter.Jeffnoreply@blogger.com