Jump to content

2023 MLB Playoffs


Toddwert

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

I think casual fans are far more likely to know what place their team is in than how many games they've won, and the battle is only for the casual fan, because they already got you and me.

They gave up on 12-(and 14- and 16-) team tables way back in 1968 when Joe Cronin was quoted as saying, "You can’t sell a 12th-place club."

That was back when they had no playoffs, so it was logical that you couldn't sell even an eighth place team.  Now, an eighth place team is most likely in the race late in the season. 

To your point, a colleague who knows nothing about baseball did notice that the Red Sox were in last and the Tigers were in second.  I was able to explain to him in seconds why the Tigers were in no better position than the Red Sox at the time.  Of course, he's very good a math and logic, so that may have been the reason.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, oblong said:

I still can't get past the idea that some hold that playoff formats need to be fixed because some teams end up beating other teams.  The playoffs aren't meant to be a formality.  That goes against the essence of being a fan of sports.  Otherwise it's just pro wrestling.

 

I think the point is that it should be hard for an 85 win team to beat a 105-win team.  Otherwise, why play 162 games?  Big upsets are fun if they are unusual like in baseketball. If they happen all the time, then it makes the whole process look random.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I think the point is that it should be hard for an 85 win team to beat a 105-win team.  Otherwise, why play 162 games?  Big upsets are fun if they are unusual like in baseketball. If they happen all the time, then it makes the whole process look random.  

Some would say there is some randomness to whether a team ends up with 85 wins or 105 wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

Some would say there is some randomness to whether a team ends up with 85 wins or 105 wins.

Indeed, and the other truth is that over a 6 month season, with injuries, trades, promotions, often the team that finishes in September is quite a different team than the one that accumulated its record. So there is always some lesser or greater degree to which a record doesn't even belong to that current team.

But take it from a different tack: Since in truth we know that the outcome probability of any short series between two baseball teams with between 500 and 600 records is so close to even that neither team should have any expectation of being favored, do you *want* to bias the outcome to the advantage of the team that did better through the regular season exactly as the reward for that performance? That is a philosophical question, not a mathematical one. 

Edited by gehringer_2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Should of kept Castellanos.  

Indeed. The irony of letting Nick and JD go, both at least in part over dissatisfaction with their defense, was the team defense did not improve. It's begun to improve now several years later, but certainly not as any consequence of moving those two guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Indeed, and the other truth is that with injuries, trades, promotions, often the team that finishes in September is quite a different team than the one that accumulated its record. 

 

Yes, it can be a very different team by September.  However, one thing that used to make baseball special is that generally only teams that were great all season made the playoffs.  A team had to come to play for 162 games or it would miss the playoffs.  I know there are some exceptions, but that was the case moreso than today. It's stupid to have a 162-game season if all anybody cares about is the playoffs.  If you want to have a playoff of the best teams at the current time, then have a shorter season where players don't beat themselves up by the time the post-season tournament comes around.  Or have a split season with two playoffs.  

Edited by Tiger337
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Indeed. The irony of letting Nick and JD go, both at least in part over dissatisfaction with their defense, was the team defense did not improve. It's begun to improve now several years later, but certainly not as any consequence of moving those two guys.

They would have been better than Cabrera plus that multi-position flavor of the year.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I know it will never happen but the more we've kicked this idea around the more I like it.

I don't really like it.  It's more a matter of not liking the status quo. I don't like that playoffs have become the only thing that matters, but that's not going to change.  So, I would consider alternatives to the current structure.    

Edited by Tiger337
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

I soured on Nick when he would whine about Comerica’s outfield dimensions.  He was never going to be successful here.

 

He had an 820 OPS his last four years with Detroit.  He wasn't good, because he couldn't field, but he was hitting OK.  The guy I really wish they kept though was Martinez.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

He had an 820 OPS his last four years with Detroit.  He wasn't good, because he couldn't field, but he was hitting OK.  The guy I really wish they kept though was Martinez.    

Agree on JD.  The decision to tear it all down at once was both flawed and unnecessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Tenacious D said:

I soured on Nick when he would whine about Comerica’s outfield dimensions.  He was never going to be successful here.

 

Building a team for COPA is a little tricky. On average you're going to end up with OF with less bat because it's a harder OF to hide a bad fielder. In turn that means you are probably prone to taking chances on IFs with more offensive potential but whose gloves may end up not playing (W. Castro.....). I always though Avila knew what he wanted, but it was like he always underestimated how hard it would be to replace the players he was willing to let go when they were not ideal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Building a team for COPA is a little tricky. On average you're going to end up with OF with less bat because it's a harder OF to hide a bad fielder. In turn that means you are probably prone to taking chances on IFs with more offensive potential but whose gloves may end up not playing (W. Castro.....). I always though Avila knew what he wanted, but it was like he always underestimated how hard it would be to replace the players he was willing to let go when they were not ideal.

In fairness, Nick was drafted as a HS shortstop, with the intent of having him play 3B, which didn’t work out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...