AEW Champion’s Random MLB Musings

AEW Champion

AEW Champion

God’s favorite poster
Generally I post in the Reds thread, but occasionally I have other baseball opinions and thoughts that don’t really fit there, so I figured I’d create a running thread for random topics as they arise.

My first thought is about how the MLB’s playoff seeding can end up favoring the #2 seeds over the #1 seeds. By guaranteeing that the third division winner is the #3 seed, that can really benefit the 2 seed.

Look at it this year. In the AL, the Astros or Yankees will be the #1 seed. Whoever wins the dreadful AL Central gets the 3 seed. Let’s say it’s Cleveland. The three wildcard teams (Toronto, Tampa, Seattle) all have better records than Cleveland. The #1 seed will have to face 4 or 5 — likely Toronto, IMO. The 2 seed gets Cleveland or the #6 seed. I’d much rather avoid Toronto as long as possible.

In the NL, the Dodgers, Mets and Braves appear to be the three best teams in the NL. The Braves or Mets will end up being the 4 seed and in line to face the Dodgers in the divisional round, while the NL East winner gets the Cardinals or Padres. Again, I’d much rather be the 2 seed and roll the dice with STL or SD rather than be the Dodgers and get the NL East runner-up out of the chute.

As long as MLB continues to have financial inequity where the middle of the country generally is fielding lesser payrolls and therefore lesser teams than the Northeast and West Coast, the AL and NL Central champions will often continue to be weaker teams than the top wildcard teams. I would strongly consider seeding the playoffs strictly based on record. Each division winner is guaranteed a playoff spot but NOT guaranteed a top 3 seed. For example, Cleveland would be the 6 seed under this scenario and would play at Toronto in the wildcard round, which seems more correct based on the merits of those teams.

I especially think that should be how it’s seeded next year once the more balanced scheduling is in effect. There’s going to be less chance of a middling team in a terrible division (think Cardinals in this year’s NL Central) being able to rack up as many free wins as they’re able to do under the current schedule.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 
 
AEW Champion said:
Generally I post in the Reds thread, but occasionally I have other baseball opinions and thoughts that don’t really fit there, so I figured I’d create a running thread for random topics as they arise.

My first thought is about how the MLB’s playoff seeding can end up favoring the #2 seeds over the #1 seeds. By guaranteeing that the third division winner is the #3 seed, that can really benefit the 2 seed.

Look at it this year. In the AL, the Astros or Yankees will be the #1 seed. Whoever wins the dreadful AL Central gets the 3 seed. Let’s say it’s Cleveland. The three wildcard teams (Toronto, Tampa, Seattle) all have better records than Cleveland. The #1 seed will have to face 4 or 5 — likely Toronto, IMO. The 2 seed gets Cleveland or the #6 seed. I’d much rather avoid Toronto as long as possible.

In the NL, the Dodgers, Mets and Braves appear to be the three best teams in the NL. The Braves or Mets will end up being the 4 seed and in line to face the Dodgers in the divisional round, while the NL East winner gets the Cardinals or Padres. Again, I’d much rather be the 2 seed and roll the dice with STL or SD rather than be the Dodgers and get the NL East runner-up out of the chute.

As long as MLB continues to have financial inequity where the middle of the country generally is fielding lesser payrolls and therefore lesser teams than the Northeast and West Coast, the AL and NL Central champions will often continue to be weaker teams than the top wildcard teams. I would strongly consider seeding the playoffs strictly based on record. Each division winner is guaranteed a playoff spot but NOT guaranteed a top 3 seed. For example, Cleveland would be the 6 seed under this scenario and would play at Toronto in the wildcard round, which seems more correct based on the merits of those teams.

I especially think that should be how it’s seeded next year once the more balanced scheduling is in effect. There’s going to be less chance of a middling team in a terrible division (think Cardinals in this year’s NL Central) being able to rack up as many free wins as they’re able to do under the current schedule.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
Click to expand...
I think after this season and with next years balanced schedule, you'll see more of an NBA type playoff seeding where it's all according to record. About every season, no matter how things shake out it seems like there is some way a team in the playoff gets a better schedule. It's just the way things work out.
 
14Red said:
I think after this season and with next years balanced schedule, you'll see more of an NBA type playoff seeding where it's all according to record. About every season, no matter how things shake out it seems like there is some way a team in the playoff gets a better schedule. It's just the way things work out.
Click to expand...
Hopefully they will get rid of guaranteeing a top 3 seed for a division winner. But I won’t hold my breath.

I think it’s clear that Manfred wants expansion to 32 teams, so it’s likely the league would be reorganized into four divisions of 8 teams at that time. That would solve the issue of how a third division winner is treated in the playoffs.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 
For several years now, I’ve been of the opinion that the MLB season is way too long. There is no need for 162 games to figure out who is playoff-worthy, especially now that 12 teams make the playoffs. I looked a few weeks ago and 13 or 14 teams were already playing meaningless games even then. It’s not healthy for a product to have so much of its inventory of games be meaningless. Teams long out of contention included:

Royals
Tigers
Angels
Rangers
A’s
Marlins
Nationals
Cubs
Pirates
Reds
Giants
Rockies
Diamondbacks
Red Sox

The other issue is that the final month of the regular season dies on the vine once football starts. Almost no one is paying attention to baseball right now except to keep track of whether Judge and Pujols reach their respective HR marks. I still try to watch baseball Tuesday and Wednesday nights. But I’m locked into the NFL Thursday, Sunday and Monday, and college football Saturday. And I usually am doing something social Friday night; maybe the Reds are on where I go, maybe not.

The other great league-wide stories should have already crescendoed, such as:
1. The great Mets vs Braves race.
2. Seattle trying to break the longest playoff drought in pro sports.
3. Teams like Baltimore and Cleveland going toe to toe with much larger payrolls.

It is OK for MLB to acknowledge and work around football’s popularity. Just a few years ago, the PGA Tour totally revamped their schedule so that the FedEx Cup would get done the week before Labor Day so that their year end wouldn’t be lost in the shuffle to football.

I feel like around 140 games is the sweet spot for the schedule. Instead of the regular season dragging until the beginning of October, 3 weeks would be shaved off, thus ending the regular season right as the NFL is beginning.

The way to get to that number?

12 games vs division = 48 games
3 games vs 14 opponents from other league = 42 games
3 games vs one of your league’s divisions = 15 games
6 games vs the other of your league’s divisions = 30 games
6 games vs other league “rival” = 6 games

Total = 141 games

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 
Last edited:
Interesting that with most teams having 12-13 games left, there is very little drama in the playoff chase. Only real questions are:
- Can Milwaukee catch Philly for the final NL wild card spot? 2.5 games back.
- Can Atlanta catch the Mets for the NL East title? 1.5 games back.

Everything else is settled, more or less, except the order of the 3 wild cards in both leagues, and who really cares if they are 4,5 or 6 seed? I guess #4 gets a home field 3 game series in the first round, so that is good. San Diego has 4th locked in the NL but Seattle, Toronto and Tampa are all within a game of each other in the AL, so that is worth fighting for.
 
wolves82 said:
Interesting that with most teams having 12-13 games left, there is very little drama in the playoff chase. Only real questions are:
- Can Milwaukee catch Philly for the final NL wild card spot? 2.5 games back.
- Can Atlanta catch the Mets for the NL East title? 1.5 games back.

Everything else is settled, more or less, except the order of the 3 wild cards in both leagues, and who really cares if they are 4,5 or 6 seed? I guess #4 gets a home field 3 game series in the first round, so that is good. San Diego has 4th locked in the NL but Seattle, Toronto and Tampa are all within a game of each other in the AL, so that is worth fighting for.
Click to expand...
In both the leagues, if you can’t be the 4 seed as a wildcard, it’s advantageous to end up as the 6 seed. The 5 seed is a real dead spot.

In the NL, if you’re the 6, you take your chances at STL, then play the NL East winner. If you’re the 5, you have to start at the NL East loser, both of whom are better than the Cardinals, and if you get through that, you play the Dodgers.

If you’re the 6 in the AL, you stay on Cleveland’s and the Yankees’ side of the bracket instead of getting the 4 seed and the Astros.

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 
What makes a successful professional sport? Great competition and an even playing field.

Look at the NFL. Talk about parity. After 4 games , 15 of the 32 teams are 2-2. Another 15 teams are either 1-3 or 3-1. Only Philly is unbeaten, and only Houston is winless.

This is why we love the NFL. Any team can beat any team on any given day. 25 teams think they can make the Super Bowl. The salary cap and salary floor works. If only the MLB could be smart enough to use this concept...
 
If I were Rob Manfred, you can best your last dollar there’d be no off day today for the two ALDS series.

You have to maximize the days where you’re not going head-to-head with football. If you’ve got four series, have them all playing on Tuesdays and Wednesdays when there’s no football going on.

On the flip side, scheduling four games for an NFL Sunday is absolute lunacy. Especially going head-to-head with Bills-Chiefs and Cowboys-Eagles.

Also, it’s time to acknowledge through TV scheduling that:
1. The games are slow and have ample down time.
2. We’re a multi-screen society.

On days with four playoff games, why are we scheduling a game at noon or 1 pm? I know we’re increasingly a service economy where not everyone works 8 to 5, but you’re still cutting out plenty of fans by scheduling weekday afternoon playoff games. I’d especially be frustrated if my team were in the playoffs and kept getting scheduled for early afternoon games.

You can play all four games at night. Stagger the start times for 5 pm, 6:15, 7:30 and 8:45 pm ET. That way people can do multi-screen viewing or flip around as they please, especially if one game is a blowout or dud. Create a mini version of NFL Sunday Ticket. Having 3 games going on at once would tell fans “you gotta be watching tonight.”

It’s true, it’s true. Trust me …
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top