Divisional playoffs

[twballgame9]

if the AL is so dominant, then why since 2000 is it AL 5, NL 4?

2000 New York Yankees
2001 Arizona Diamondbacks
2002 Anaheim Angels ◊
2003 Florida Marlins ◊
2004 Boston Red Sox ◊
2005 Chicago White Sox
2006 St. Louis Cardinals
2007 Boston Red Sox
2008 Philadelphia Phillies

i agree the AL is probably a deeper league but in terms of the top teams the talent is comparable.

I didn't say the Al was dominant in winning playoff series. I said the talent, especially offensively, is MUCH tougher in the American League. That is why Matt Holiday went from shitbum on a crappy team to NL All Star with a simple trade, and the reason why Carpenter's ERA would go up a run and a half if he switched leagues again.

In the playoffs, it is not about who has the best team for the regular season, it's about who gets the hot bats and pitching. That is why it is fun, and it is why an inferior team from an inferior league (the 06 Cardinals being the best example) can get hot an win it all. And I say, good for baseball.

[talon]

Why has the MLB championship never just been awarded to the team with the best record after 162 games?

For many, many years, the team with the best record in the AL won the AL pennant w/out a playoff. The team with the best record in the NL won the NL pennant w/out a playoff. Since the two teams played completely different schedules, you couldn't just award the WS to the team with the best overall schedule because they didn't play the same teams.

As long as MLB has this imbalanced schedule, playoffs will be necessary, but I think you can have a better idea about who is the best team after a 162 game season (baseball) than after a 16 game season (football).

[twballgame9]

Why has the MLB championship never just been awarded to the team with the best record after 162 games?

For many, many years, the team with the best record in the AL won the AL pennant w/out a playoff. The team with the best record in the NL won the NL pennant w/out a playoff. Since the two teams played completely different schedules, you couldn't just award the WS to the team with the best overall schedule because they didn't play the same teams.

As long as MLB has this imbalanced schedule, playoffs will be necessary, but I think you can have a better idea about who is the best team after a 162 game season (baseball) than after a 16 game season (football).

I am not interested in who is the best team. I am interested in who wins the World Series. I would think this would hit home with a Giants football fan, although I suppose it justifies "FOOTBALL IS DIFFERENT THAN BASEBALL....OOL"

[talon]

Why has the MLB championship never just been awarded to the team with the best record after 162 games?

For many, many years, the team with the best record in the AL won the AL pennant w/out a playoff. The team with the best record in the NL won the NL pennant w/out a playoff. Since the two teams played completely different schedules, you couldn't just award the WS to the team with the best overall schedule because they didn't play the same teams.

As long as MLB has this imbalanced schedule, playoffs will be necessary, but I think you can have a better idea about who is the best team after a 162 game season (baseball) than after a 16 game season (football).

I am not interested in who is the best team. I am interested in who wins the World Series. I would think this would hit home with a Giants football fan, although I suppose it justifies "FOOTBALL IS DIFFERENT THAN BASEBALL....OOL"

Football is different than baseball.

[twballgame9]

Why has the MLB championship never just been awarded to the team with the best record after 162 games?

For many, many years, the team with the best record in the AL won the AL pennant w/out a playoff. The team with the best record in the NL won the NL pennant w/out a playoff. Since the two teams played completely different schedules, you couldn't just award the WS to the team with the best overall schedule because they didn't play the same teams.

As long as MLB has this imbalanced schedule, playoffs will be necessary, but I think you can have a better idea about who is the best team after a 162 game season (baseball) than after a 16 game season (football).

I am not interested in who is the best team. I am interested in who wins the World Series. I would think this would hit home with a Giants football fan, although I suppose it justifies "FOOTBALL IS DIFFERENT THAN BASEBALL....OOL"

Football is different than baseball.

has to be, or it fucks your argument. Again I ask: why bother with the playoffs in baseball?


You keep rooting for teams to win the regular season trophy. I will enjoy the 2006 Cardinals.

[talon]

Again I ask: why bother with the playoffs in baseball?

Because teams don't play the same schedules.

[twballgame9]

Again I ask: why bother with the playoffs in baseball?

Because teams don't play the same schedules.

Exactly. And that is precisely why the Wild Card Red Sox, with a better record than all teams other than the Yankees and Angels, belong in the playoffs. When the Tigers start playing the Yankees and Red Sox 19 times a year, come talk to me.

Without the wild card, we never get to see the ridiculous back to back 2003 and 2004 ALCS series. I like the Wild Card. I like BC Football.

[talon]

How difficult would it be to scrap interleague play and and have all the teams in the same league play a balanced schedule? Not very.

How difficult would it be for all the teams in the NFL play a balanced schedule? Impossible (without massive contraction of teams or massive expansion of the schedule).

thus BASEBALL ≠ FOOTBALL

Football has in imbalanced schedule because they HAVE TO. Baseball has an imbalanced schedule because they CHOOSE TO.

[branchinator]

In a 7 game series, the better team wins the large majority of the time, which is good enough for me. Baseball and football are similar in that teams that previously sucked or were mediocre can get hot for a month and win the championship. By the end of the 2007 football season, the Patriots were trending downwards and the Giants were trending upwards. Had they played in week 6, it would have been a Patriots blowout. By week 17, the Giants had surged and the Pats had already begun their descent. Of course, looking at the records, you saw a 16-0 team and a 10-6 team. But it continued in the playoffs. The Giants went into 2 very tough locations and played very impressively whereas the Pats struggled against the Jaguars and the Chargers.

[twballgame9]

If, as Teddy says, football=baseball (which I do not believe-- you NEVER see a baseball team called for too many men on the field), then the Wild Card is like a bowl on December 27th.

No, actually the wild card is like the wild card, except that the NFL has 4 second place finishers in the playoffs.

[twballgame9]

How difficult would it be to scrap interleague play and and have all the teams in the same league play a balanced schedule? Not very.

How difficult would it be for all the teams in the NFL play a balanced schedule? Impossible (without massive contraction of teams or massive expansion of the schedule).

thus BASEBALL ≠ FOOTBALL

Football has in imbalanced schedule because they HAVE TO. Baseball has an imbalanced schedule because they CHOOSE TO.

They choose to for a reason. It's more exciting and more people watch and they make more money as a result.

[talon]

How difficult would it be to scrap interleague play and and have all the teams in the same league play a balanced schedule? Not very.

How difficult would it be for all the teams in the NFL play a balanced schedule? Impossible (without massive contraction of teams or massive expansion of the schedule).

thus BASEBALL ≠ FOOTBALL

Football has in imbalanced schedule because they HAVE TO. Baseball has an imbalanced schedule because they CHOOSE TO.

They choose to for a reason. It's more exciting and more people watch and they make more money as a result.

Then why not expand the playoffs to four rounds? After all, more playoffs equals more exciting, right?

[twballgame9]

How difficult would it be to scrap interleague play and and have all the teams in the same league play a balanced schedule? Not very.

How difficult would it be for all the teams in the NFL play a balanced schedule? Impossible (without massive contraction of teams or massive expansion of the schedule).

thus BASEBALL ≠ FOOTBALL

Football has in imbalanced schedule because they HAVE TO. Baseball has an imbalanced schedule because they CHOOSE TO.

They choose to for a reason. It's more exciting and more people watch and they make more money as a result.

Then why not expand the playoffs to four rounds? After all, more playoffs equals more exciting, right?

It's not about volume - the wild card assures that the best teams get in, even if there are two of them in the same division. The Red Sox had the third best record in the majors, playing an unbalanced schedule in a division that had 1) this year's best record and 2) last year's AL representative in the WS.

Fact is that this whole thing was not about increasing games to increase revenue. It was about increasing excitement by elevating the level of play by adding better teams. Like a 95 win Sox team that would be left out in your system. If you remember correctly, this whole thing was triggered by a 100-win Giants team getting beat out by 1 game to a 100-win Braves team, while some middling 90 win team went to the playoffs.

[talon]

in 1993, the Braves had 104 wins and SF had 103 (or maybe it was 105 and 104). The Phillies had 97 wins.

I can't remember if there was a balanced schedule, or if teams in one division played the teams in their own division more frequently than the teams in the other division or not.

If the schedules were balanced, then I would say Atlanta should have played SF in the NLCS instead of Philadelphia. If the schedules weren't balanced, how do you directly compare the Giants to the Phillies? But, after 162 games, if the Giants couldn't finish with a better record than the Braves over an identical schedule, then fuck San Fran.

[ryfarls]

WILD CARD BITCHES!!

[Shredder]

smoltz was tipping pitches. the fact your coaching staff couldn't pick up on that doesn't say much for them. as for the best pitchers, i'll admit that Beckett is an outstanding pitcher but carpenter is just as filthy. Carpenter is one of those pitchers who emerged from TJ surgery and became a much better pitcher. there are other examples of this. i'll give you that your closer is better... but the cardinals have a crazy good 1-2 punch in Pujols (the best hitter in all of baseball and arguably the best player in the game right now) and Matt Holliday. the red sox have a deeper lineup but that's a result of the DH... AL teams will always (or should at least) have deeper lineups. and, as for the devil rays, they were awful this year.

Tipping what, his 84 mph fastball? Every AL-castoff pitcher the Cardinals pick up that feasts on the Cards' divisional opponents (Cincy, Pitt, even Milwaukee and Chicago were trash this year) and then the Nats and Padres to do well, is revealed to have been tipping pitches by Dave Duncan. They said it about Piniero when they got him. Notice that Lugo also turned into a productive player when he joined Holliday in LaRussa and Duncan's fountain of youth. Cliff Lee is a very good pitcher but wasn't vying for a repeat of the Cy Young in the AL this year (to his credit, Cleveland gave him no support) to being the actual Cy Young in the NL (still, with a nice Phillies offense).

Before the 1969 expansion, the best team in each league went to the World Series. There weren't 30 teams in MLB back then and there were a lot of meaningless games--the Yankees teams of the 50s would clinch really early. The reason why the best team might not always be the one who wins the most games isn't just because of the non-balanced schedule but because a team can be structured to destroy teams with weak pitching but not teams that have both good pitching and good hitting. Head to head, the second or even third best team in terms of record can beat the team with the overall best record. So really, who would be the best in that scenario?

[talon]

The reason why the best team might not always be the one who wins the most games isn't just because of the non-balanced schedule but because a team can be structured to destroy teams with weak pitching but not teams that have both good pitching and good hitting. Head to head, the second or even third best team in terms of record can beat the team with the overall best record. So really, who would be the best in that scenario?

If all the teams in the AL played the exact same schedule, the team that finished in first place would be the best team. The team that finished in second place team would be the second best team. The team that finished in third place would be the third place team.

It's not like baseball is a 20 game regular season. If you can't prove yourself after over 150 games, then tough shit.

[WilpertsRevenge]

smoltz was tipping pitches. the fact your coaching staff couldn't pick up on that doesn't say much for them. as for the best pitchers, i'll admit that Beckett is an outstanding pitcher but carpenter is just as filthy. Carpenter is one of those pitchers who emerged from TJ surgery and became a much better pitcher. there are other examples of this. i'll give you that your closer is better... but the cardinals have a crazy good 1-2 punch in Pujols (the best hitter in all of baseball and arguably the best player in the game right now) and Matt Holliday. the red sox have a deeper lineup but that's a result of the DH... AL teams will always (or should at least) have deeper lineups. and, as for the devil rays, they were awful this year.

Tipping what, his 84 mph fastball? Every AL-castoff pitcher the Cardinals pick up that feasts on the Cards' divisional opponents (Cincy, Pitt, even Milwaukee and Chicago were trash this year) and then the Nats and Padres to do well, is revealed to have been tipping pitches by Dave Duncan. They said it about Piniero when they got him. Notice that Lugo also turned into a productive player when he joined Holliday in LaRussa and Duncan's fountain of youth. Cliff Lee is a very good pitcher but wasn't vying for a repeat of the Cy Young in the AL this year (to his credit, Cleveland gave him no support) to being the actual Cy Young in the NL (still, with a nice Phillies offense).

Before the 1969 expansion, the best team in each league went to the World Series. There weren't 30 teams in MLB back then and there were a lot of meaningless games--the Yankees teams of the 50s would clinch really early. The reason why the best team might not always be the one who wins the most games isn't just because of the non-balanced schedule but because a team can be structured to destroy teams with weak pitching but not teams that have both good pitching and good hitting. Head to head, the second or even third best team in terms of record can beat the team with the overall best record. So really, who would be the best in that scenario?

The argument that John Smoltz after 20yrs in baseball started tipping his pitches is absolutely ridiculous. The NL is a fountain of youth for pitchers because the lineups are weaker with no DH.

[hansen]

smoltz was tipping pitches. the fact your coaching staff couldn't pick up on that doesn't say much for them. as for the best pitchers, i'll admit that Beckett is an outstanding pitcher but carpenter is just as filthy. Carpenter is one of those pitchers who emerged from TJ surgery and became a much better pitcher. there are other examples of this. i'll give you that your closer is better... but the cardinals have a crazy good 1-2 punch in Pujols (the best hitter in all of baseball and arguably the best player in the game right now) and Matt Holliday. the red sox have a deeper lineup but that's a result of the DH... AL teams will always (or should at least) have deeper lineups. and, as for the devil rays, they were awful this year.

Tipping what, his 84 mph fastball? Every AL-castoff pitcher the Cardinals pick up that feasts on the Cards' divisional opponents (Cincy, Pitt, even Milwaukee and Chicago were trash this year) and then the Nats and Padres to do well, is revealed to have been tipping pitches by Dave Duncan. They said it about Piniero when they got him. Notice that Lugo also turned into a productive player when he joined Holliday in LaRussa and Duncan's fountain of youth. Cliff Lee is a very good pitcher but wasn't vying for a repeat of the Cy Young in the AL this year (to his credit, Cleveland gave him no support) to being the actual Cy Young in the NL (still, with a nice Phillies offense).

Before the 1969 expansion, the best team in each league went to the World Series. There weren't 30 teams in MLB back then and there were a lot of meaningless games--the Yankees teams of the 50s would clinch really early. The reason why the best team might not always be the one who wins the most games isn't just because of the non-balanced schedule but because a team can be structured to destroy teams with weak pitching but not teams that have both good pitching and good hitting. Head to head, the second or even third best team in terms of record can beat the team with the overall best record. So really, who would be the best in that scenario?

The argument that John Smoltz after 20yrs in baseball started tipping his pitches is absolutely ridiculous. The NL is a fountain of youth for pitchers because the lineups are weaker with no DH.

hey, i'm just reporting what i read. does having to pitch to a DH over a pitcher help a pitcher's era? sure. i don't think anyone would argue that point.

then again, the DH is teh ghey.
there, i said it.

[claver2010]

Agreed, DH = teh ghey. AL isn't real baseball.

[branchinator]

Agreed, DH = teh ghey. AL isn't real baseball.

You're a Mets fan. How would you know what real baseball looks like?

[Endless Mike]

Agreed, DH = teh ghey. AL isn't real baseball.

You're a Mets fan. How would you know what real baseball looks like?

FAXCIAL.

[claver2010]

Well done, a little weird that you remember that I'm a mets fan though.

[Shredder]

Agreed, DH = teh ghey. AL isn't real baseball.

I admit that I do like the late game managing involving a pitcher having to bat and also some of the defensive strategies (such as wheel plays) when a pitcher does bat. What I don't like is a rally being thwarted by walking the eighth hitter to face a pitcher and seeing a pitcher lay down a bunt with one out and down four runs. The DH/pitcher-bat divide is an interesting wrinkle and I kind of like having it that way. It's unlikely either league will give in to the other style. It was the NL that suggested the DH back in the 1920s.

[branchinator]

Well done, a little weird that you remember that I'm a mets fan though.

It's not like you've only mentioned it once. You read something enough, you remember things.

[twballgame9]

The reason why the best team might not always be the one who wins the most games isn't just because of the non-balanced schedule but because a team can be structured to destroy teams with weak pitching but not teams that have both good pitching and good hitting. Head to head, the second or even third best team in terms of record can beat the team with the overall best record. So really, who would be the best in that scenario?

If all the teams in the AL played the exact same schedule, the team that finished in first place would be the best team. The team that finished in second place team would be the second best team. The team that finished in third place would be the third place team.

It's not like baseball is a 20 game regular season. If you can't prove yourself after over 150 games, then tough shit.

So no more playoffs. Stupid. baseball is about winning the World Series - if you can't do that, fuck you. Fuck you more if you won 120 games like the Mariners. If the team with the best record was the best team, they would win the World Series. The Giants were the best team in football two years ago. The Red Sox were the best team in baseball in 2004. Enjoy your regular season championships (that you mock Patriots fans so openly for).

[twballgame9]

Agreed, DH = teh ghey. AL isn't real baseball.

I prefer major league baseball players playing fake baseball over minor league players playing real baseball. Just sayin'. Go Matt Holliday and Julio Lugo!!!!!!!111!!!!!

[branchinator]

How many theoretical championships do the Yankees have this decade? 6? 7? The Yankees looked like the best team in baseball in the 2nd half of the season. If they truly ARE the best team in baseball as of today, they'll win the World Series.

[twballgame9]

How many theoretical championships do the Yankees have this decade? 6? 7? The Yankees looked like the best team in baseball in the 2nd half of the season. If they truly ARE the best team in baseball as of today, they'll win the World Series.

And THAT, is my point in a nutshell. Winning the most games over 162 means exactly jack squat, other than determining the 8 teams that should get to play for the championship. In my book, that should include the second best record when they happen to be in the same arbitrarily selected division as the first best record.

[twballgame9]

I like the way the NHL does it. Play 96 games and then just eliminate the Nordee-Ques. Any team without a forfeit makes the playoffs.

Are the Nordiques still around? I don't hear much about them anymore. Aren't they the Tobacco Road Nordy-Cues now?

you say this like you don't know that the whale has turned from suck ass hockey to red neck hockey!

The Nordee-Ques are in Denver, not North Carolina.