Author Topic: MLB to expand to 10 playoff teams next year (Read 8930 times)

Bench · « **on:** April 21, 2011, 03:41:23 pm »

So says SI.

"I would say we're moving to expanding the playoffs, but there's a myriad of details to work out," Selig said Thursday at his annual meeting with the Associated Press Sports Editors. "Ten is a fair number."

"The more we've talked about it, I think we're moving inexorably to that," he said.

Basically, each league would have two wild card teams who would play each other to see who goes to the division series.

Ron Brand · « **Reply #1 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:02:36 pm »

Fuck Bud Selig.

MusicMan · « **Reply #2 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:04:51 pm »

Quote from: Ron Brand on April 21, 2011, 04:02:36 pm

Fuck Bud Selig.

I actually don't have a problem with this one. The WC team should be at some sort of disadvantage.

Bench · « **Reply #3 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:16:45 pm »

Quote from: MusicMan on April 21, 2011, 04:04:51 pm

I actually don't have a problem with this one. The WC team should be at some sort of disadvantage.

Yeah, I agree. I'm generally against increasing the playoffs as I think the limited number of teams in the post-season is one of the things that makes this the grandest game of all, but this doesn't really bother me.

subnuclear · « **Reply #4 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:20:14 pm »

Mid-November baseball will be interesting in a lot places.

Limey · « **Reply #5 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:21:42 pm »

Quote from: Bench on April 21, 2011, 04:16:45 pm

Yeah, I agree. I'm generally against increasing the playoffs as I think the limited number of teams in the post-season is one of the things that makes this the grandest game of all, but this doesn't really bother me.

Just as long as it doesn't turn into ~~the NBA~~ Little League, where every kid gets a medal.

OregonStrosFan · « **Reply #6 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:22:00 pm »

Quote from: MusicMan on April 21, 2011, 04:04:51 pm

I actually don't have a problem with this one. The WC team should be at some sort of disadvantage.

As long as it is not just a 1-game playoff, I'm fine with it. If it is just a 1-game playoff it'll piss me off...

Ron Brand · « **Reply #7 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:22:57 pm »

I don't want to see this turn into the NBA. The playoff system killed that for me and I don't follow it at all.

pots · « **Reply #8 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:24:39 pm »

Quote from: OregonStrosFan on April 21, 2011, 04:22:00 pm

As long as it is not just a 1-game playoff, I'm fine with it. If it is just a 1-game playoff it'll piss me off...

I don't know. A 1 game playoff can be unfair..but good, win your damn division next time

BudGirl · « **Reply #9 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:30:41 pm »

Quote from: pots on April 21, 2011, 04:24:39 pm

I don't know. A 1 game playoff can be unfair..but good, win your damn division next time

How did the Astros do as Wild Card teams?

Limey · « **Reply #10 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:31:08 pm »

Quote from: pots on April 21, 2011, 04:24:39 pm

I don't know. A 1 game playoff can be unfair..but good, win your damn division next time

I think the theory is that the WC team comes in with the same shot as any other team. Numerous WC teams - including the Astros, on occasion* - have spoiled the party, so the idea is to give them another hurdle to climb before they go up against a division winner. Just like the NFL.

I have no problem with this. But one game is enough.

* Or to the Astros....

EasTexAstro · « **Reply #11 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:31:44 pm »

Will we get to the point of having banners reading "2nd place Wild Card Co-champions"?

dirty steve · « **Reply #12 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:34:09 pm »

Quote from: Ron Brand on April 21, 2011, 04:22:57 pm

I don't want to see this turn into the NBA. The playoff system killed that for me and I don't follow it at all.

especially when they expanded the first round to seven games and have two day layoffs between each game.

Waldo · « **Reply #13 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:35:32 pm »

Quote from: subnuclear on April 21, 2011, 04:20:14 pm

Mid-November baseball will be interesting in a lot places.

I thought part of the plan was to also compress the playoff schedule so that some teams didn't have a week off between playoff series.

JimR · « **Reply #14 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:36:37 pm »

Quote from: OregonStrosFan on April 21, 2011, 04:22:00 pm

As long as it is not just a 1-game playoff, I'm fine with it. If it is just a 1-game playoff it'll piss me off...

why?

Bench · « **Reply #15 on:** April 21, 2011, 04:48:07 pm »

Quote from: Waldo on April 21, 2011, 04:35:32 pm

I thought part of the plan was to also compress the playoff schedule so that some teams didn't have a week off between playoff series.

That would be a welcome change.

OregonStrosFan · « **Reply #16 on:** April 21, 2011, 05:40:16 pm »

Quote from: JimR on April 21, 2011, 04:36:37 pm

why?

Personal preference. IMO, a 1-game playoff can potentially have a lot more to do with happenstance/fluke/luck, etc. than I'd like to see. At least a 3-game series takes a little bit of that out of the equation (or I can accept 2 games of happenstance/fluke/luck better than a could accept a single game of it, I guess...).

[And yes, I realize that there are 1-game 'playoffs' for tied teams now, but if MLB is going to expand the 'post season playoffs,' I'd like to see it decided by at least a best of 3 series...].

roadrunner · « **Reply #17 on:** April 21, 2011, 09:05:58 pm »

I think a 3 game series with no off days at the higher seeded city is fine. It should provide a little more excitement towards the end of the regular season for more teams (I realize this isn't always going to be the case, but you would think more often than not).

While Selig's at it, he should make the Division Series 7 games, too.

JimR · « **Reply #18 on:** April 22, 2011, 10:37:11 am »

Quote from: OregonStrosFan on April 21, 2011, 05:40:16 pm

Personal preference. IMO, a 1-game playoff can potentially have a lot more to do with happenstance/fluke/luck, etc. than I'd like to see. At least a 3-game series takes a little bit of that out of the equation (or I can accept 2 games of happenstance/fluke/luck better than a could accept a single game of it, I guess...).

[And yes, I realize that there are 1-game 'playoffs' for tied teams now, but if MLB is going to expand the 'post season playoffs,' I'd like to see it decided by at least a best of 3 series...].

not me. happenstance and luck only happen in one game? aren't they part of sports?

Lurch · « **Reply #19 on:** April 22, 2011, 10:39:16 am »

Quote from: JimR on April 22, 2011, 10:37:11 am

not me. happenstance and luck only happen in one game? aren't they part of sports?

Likelihood reduced with each addl game

OregonStrosFan · « **Reply #20 on:** April 22, 2011, 11:19:02 am »

Quote from: Lurch on April 22, 2011, 10:39:16 am

Likelihood reduced with each addl game

This.

MRaup · « **Reply #21 on:** April 22, 2011, 12:30:44 pm »

Quote from: OregonStrosFan on April 22, 2011, 11:19:02 am

This.

Right up until both teams win 3 games and something flukish/freaky happens in Game 7.

IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BEST OF 9! THIS IS BULLSHIT!!!1!

JimR · « **Reply #22 on:** April 22, 2011, 12:57:07 pm »

Quote from: MRaup on April 22, 2011, 12:30:44 pm

Right up until both teams win 3 games and something flukish/freaky happens in Game 7.

IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BEST OF 9! THIS IS BULLSHIT!!!1!

exactly right.

JimR · « **Reply #23 on:** April 22, 2011, 12:59:57 pm »

Quote from: Lurch on April 22, 2011, 10:39:16 am

Likelihood reduced with each addl game

likelihood of what? define luck and/or fluke.

Jacksonian · « **Reply #24 on:** April 22, 2011, 01:03:04 pm »

Quote from: JimR on April 22, 2011, 12:59:57 pm

likelihood of what? define luck and/or fluke.

Towles throws out a base runner.

Ron Brand · « **Reply #25 on:** April 22, 2011, 01:05:28 pm »

Hall takes a pitch.

pots · « **Reply #26 on:** April 22, 2011, 01:16:35 pm »

Lee leads the league in triples

austro · « **Reply #27 on:** April 22, 2011, 01:17:40 pm »

Quote from: Jacksonian on April 22, 2011, 01:03:04 pm

Towles throws out a base runner.

Quote from: Ron Brand on April 22, 2011, 01:05:28 pm

Hall takes a pitch.

Quote from: pots on April 22, 2011, 01:16:35 pm

Lee leads the league in triples

Which of these things is not like the others?

Lurch · « **Reply #28 on:** April 22, 2011, 03:09:50 pm »

Quote from: JimR on April 22, 2011, 12:59:57 pm

likelihood of what? define luck and/or fluke.

Likelihood of the better team losing the series. Obviously better teams lose to inferior teams all of the time. The more they face each other,though, the less likely it is that they will lose the series.

JimR · « **Reply #29 on:** April 22, 2011, 03:15:21 pm »

Quote from: Lurch on April 22, 2011, 03:09:50 pm

Likelihood of the better team losing the series. Obviously better teams lose to inferior teams all of the time. The more they face each other,though, the less likely it is that they will lose the series.

define better team. the one that won the most in the regular season? then why have playoffs? just tell the "worse" team too bad.

total bs. is the underdog wins, it was luck or a fluke? bs.

Noe · « **Reply #30 on:** April 22, 2011, 06:24:55 pm »

Quote from: Jacksonian on April 22, 2011, 01:03:04 pm

Towles throws out a base runner.

Gunter hits a cutoff man.

JaneDoe · « **Reply #31 on:** April 22, 2011, 06:26:23 pm »

Quote from: Noe in Austin on April 22, 2011, 06:24:55 pm

Gunter hits a cutoff man with the ball.

FIFY

moriartp · « **Reply #32 on:** April 22, 2011, 08:29:47 pm »

You're all failing to see the big picture. In five years, the playoffs will be eliminated and the trophy will be awarded to the team with the highest combined WAR after 162 games. In ten years, the regular season will be eliminated in favor of a new xWAR-based simulation. Baseball is too important a business to be left to the players.

Jose Cruz III · « **Reply #33 on:** April 23, 2011, 01:18:55 pm »

Quote from: JimR on April 22, 2011, 12:59:57 pm

likelihood of what? define luck and/or fluke.

Don't know if this would be luck/fluke, and it wouldn't matter to me if it was 1 game of best of 3, but a best of 3 would give a team a chance to pitch at least 2 of their better pitchers in the rotation as opposed to a one game matchup of Norris or Figueroa against Jiminez. But in this hypothetical scenario, if the Rockies won the game, it would put Jiminez out until at least game 3 of the DS. So there again it comes back to win your division.

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #34 on:** April 24, 2011, 12:20:37 pm »

Baseball postseason is good the way it is. Baseball's resisted playoff inflation for so long...so it actually means something when a team makes the postseason. I guess it's admirable they resisted for so long.

Rebel Jew · « **Reply #35 on:** April 24, 2011, 12:35:31 pm »

Quote from: Gizzmonic on April 24, 2011, 12:20:37 pm

Baseball postseason is good the way it is. Baseball's resisted playoff inflation for so long...so it actually means something when a team makes the postseason. I guess it's admirable they resisted for so long.

162 games is a lot. in a great many ways there should only be two playoff teams.

ValpoCory · « **Reply #36 on:** April 25, 2011, 03:49:44 pm »

I'm probably in the minority in my reasoning, but I'm for this playoff expansion. Based on the Billy Beane "Playoffs are a crap shoot" line of thinking, reasonably increasing the number of playoff teams increases the odds of the Astros winning a World Series. Once the Astros get a World Series title, then I may have a different opinion.

Lurch · « **Reply #37 on:** April 25, 2011, 04:06:53 pm »

Quote from: ValpoCory on April 25, 2011, 03:49:44 pm

I'm probably in the minority in my reasoning, but I'm for this playoff expansion. Based on the Billy Beane "Playoffs are a crap shoot" line of thinking, reasonably increasing the number of playoff teams increases the odds of the Astros winning a World Series. Once the Astros get a World Series title, then I may have a different opinion.

I agree with you. I want the Astros to win a WS under just about any scenario. Other than that, may the best team win

ETA: ...except the Cards, Mets, Braves, Yankees or Red Sox.

Bench · « **Reply #38 on:** April 25, 2011, 04:14:25 pm »

Quote from: Lurch on April 25, 2011, 04:06:53 pm

I agree with you. I want the Astros to win a WS under just about any scenario. Other than that, may the best team win

ETA: ...except the Cards, Mets, Braves, Yankees or Red Sox.

I was going to point out your omission of the cubs, but then I realized you used the term "best team" which, by definition, excludes them.

austro · « **Reply #39 on:** April 25, 2011, 04:15:25 pm »

Quote from: Lurch on April 25, 2011, 04:06:53 pm

I agree with you. I want the Astros to win a WS under just about any scenario. Other than that, may the best team win

ETA: ...except the Cards, Mets, Braves, Yankees or Red Sox.

Is there a reason you omitted the Cubs from your list, comrade?

Mr. Happy · « **Reply #40 on:** April 25, 2011, 04:16:45 pm »

My feeling is that once MLB abandoned the one division per league format years ago, it only made sense to expand the playoffs to make up for a weak versus strong division problem, etc. I have no problem with the expansion to ten because I always thought it was wrong to have to wildcard team play a division winner. In my opinion, the wildcard teams should have to pay in. However, I don't want to see an NHL or NBA type playoff system. The weather already is bad enough. Can you imagine December baseball up north?

Lurch · « **Reply #41 on:** April 25, 2011, 04:26:22 pm »

Quote from: Bench on April 25, 2011, 04:14:25 pm

I was going to point out your omission of the cubs, but then I realized you used the term "best team" which, by definition, excludes them.

This.

ValpoCory · « **Reply #42 on:** April 25, 2011, 04:34:32 pm »

Quote from: Mr. Happy on April 25, 2011, 04:16:45 pm

However, I don't want to see an NHL or NBA type playoff system. The weather already is bad enough. Can you imagine December baseball up north?

If it produces an Astros World Series title, I couldn't care less what month it'll be.

Limey · « **Reply #43 on:** April 25, 2011, 05:00:27 pm »

Quote from: ValpoCory on April 25, 2011, 04:34:32 pm

If it produces an Astros World Series title, I couldn't care less what month it'll be.

At least the roof might be closed.

austro · « **Reply #44 on:** April 25, 2011, 05:06:55 pm »

Quote from: Limey on April 25, 2011, 05:00:27 pm

At least the roof might be closed.

Yeah, but the game will probably be in Milwaukee.

Mr. Happy · « **Reply #45 on:** April 25, 2011, 07:18:22 pm »

Quote from: austro on April 25, 2011, 05:06:55 pm

Yeah, but the game will probably be in Milwaukee.

Well played, sir.

Arky Vaughan · « **Reply #46 on:** April 25, 2011, 09:58:29 pm »

So if two teams are vying for the wild card throughout September and one manages to pull ahead by a few games in the last week of the season, they can meet again in a one-game playoff? That's a marvelous idea. Bud Selig is a genius.

Lurch · « **Reply #47 on:** April 26, 2011, 09:28:12 am »

Quote from: Arky Vaughan on April 25, 2011, 09:58:29 pm

So if two teams are vying for the wild card throughout September and one manages to pull ahead by a few games in the last week of the season, they can meet again in a one-game playoff? That's a marvelous idea. Bud Selig is a genius.

What's your beef w Selig on this? I think the 1-game idea was just speculation here. And as for what happened in the last week, odds are they were not playing each other, or even similar schedules that week. What am I missing?

Gizzmonic · « **Reply #48 on:** April 26, 2011, 09:35:40 am »

Yes, maybe the playoff expansion will finally enable the Cubs to get back to the World Series! Great idea, Bud!

Bench · « **Reply #49 on:** April 26, 2011, 09:35:42 am »

Quote from: Arky Vaughan on April 25, 2011, 09:58:29 pm

So if two teams are vying for the wild card throughout September and one manages to pull ahead by a few games in the last week of the season, they can meet again in a one-game playoff? That's a marvelous idea. Bud Selig is a genius.

The whole point is that the wild card team has to overcome an extra obstacle that the division winners don't.

JimR · « **Reply #50 on:** April 26, 2011, 09:44:21 am »

Quote from: Bench on April 26, 2011, 09:35:42 am

The whole point is that the wild card team has to overcome an extra obstacle that the division winners don't.

which they should

MusicMan · « **Reply #51 on:** April 26, 2011, 09:47:30 am »

Quote from: Lurch on April 26, 2011, 09:28:12 am

What's your beef w Selig on this? I think the 1-game idea was just speculation here. And as for what happened in the last week, odds are they were not playing each other, or even similar schedules that week. What am I missing?

It's Selig, so he gets attributed with the worst ideas, regardless of whether there's any basis for it.

Lurch · « **Reply #52 on:** April 26, 2011, 09:59:47 am »

Quote from: MusicMan on April 26, 2011, 09:47:30 am

It's Selig, so he gets attributed with the worst ideas, regardless of whether there's any basis for it.

<shaking fist>Obama!!!</shaking fist>

Arky Vaughan · « **Reply #53 on:** April 26, 2011, 07:31:46 pm »

Quote from: Bench on April 26, 2011, 09:35:42 am

The whole point is that the wild card team has to overcome an extra obstacle that the division winners don't.

So having them play the team they just finished ahead of is the best way to do that?

Lurch · « **Reply #54 on:** April 26, 2011, 07:51:58 pm »

Quote from: Arky Vaughan on April 26, 2011, 07:31:46 pm

So having them play the team they just finished ahead of is the best way to do that?

The better team could have had a worse record. Perfectly reasonable

roadrunner · « **Reply #55 on:** April 26, 2011, 07:55:05 pm »

Quote from: Arky Vaughan on April 26, 2011, 07:31:46 pm

So having them play the team they just finished ahead of is the best way to do that?

That's like the BCS argument against the first team out of the playoff. Win your division or shutup.

Arky Vaughan · « **Reply #56 on:** April 26, 2011, 08:25:48 pm »

Quote from: Lurch on April 26, 2011, 07:51:58 pm

The better team could have had a worse record. Perfectly reasonable

Then why not just put them all in a bracket or round robin?

Arky Vaughan · « **Reply #57 on:** April 26, 2011, 08:34:00 pm »

Quote from: roadrunner on April 26, 2011, 07:55:05 pm

That's like the BCS argument against the first team out of the playoff. Win your division or shutup.

And actually, no, it's not the same, since the BCS isn't based on wins and losses, it's based on subjective rankings.

Lurch · « **Reply #58 on:** April 27, 2011, 02:07:02 pm »

Quote from: Arky Vaughan on April 26, 2011, 08:25:48 pm

Then why not just put them all in a bracket or round robin?

Because the likelihood of the best team in MLB being excluded drops the further down the list you go. The standings give us a good picture of who the best teams are but alone aren't sufficient to determine #1. Playoffs are the obvious way to answer that question (mostly) and of course just make for great baseball. 1 wild card was probably enough already but I don't see adding 1 more as a big concern. it probably makes it more fair in reducing the likelihood of a fluky run to the WS by an unworthy wildcard. note, I'm not saying ALL wildcards are unworthy. Especially if they reign from Houston...