2018 Standings and Playoff Race Discussion

[jjfanec]

Can we play teams with a majority of right handed pitching? I love that lineup vs righties

 

Granderson, Yelich, Cain feels like a lot of guys on base to start a game. I would maybe have Moose clean up instead of Shaw but if Shaws Babip even gets back to .225 for the next few weeks we are behind - it has been near or below .100 for much of that last month.

[KeithStone53151]

Can we play teams with a majority of right handed pitching? I love that lineup vs righties

 

Granderson, Yelich, Cain feels like a lot of guys on base to start a game. I would maybe have Moose clean up instead of Shaw but if Shaws Babip even gets back to .225 for the next few weeks we are behind - it has been near or below .100 for much of that last month.

 

Granderson in the lineup leaves two of Braun/Aguilar/Thames on the bench. Right now that's obviously going to be Aguilar a significant amount of the time, but Braun is going to play more than Granderson down the stretch...no matter how hot Granderson gets at the plate.

[82brewcrew82]

Because you'd always prefer to play as worse a team as possible (or at least best matchup vs us) to increase your chances of winning.

But it'a all a crapshoot, right? And if it's not then those teams should be worried about playing us, not us worried about them. If this really is an elite team, then it shouldn't matter who we play.

 

But in a crapshoot there is still odds and every little bit counts. hitting a 7 is more likely than hitting a 6 or a 5. yes of course if you want to win it all you should do it regardless, but the easier the better. Take the NCAA tournament as an example. Would you rather play high seeds the whole way or a bunch of underdogs that pulled off upsets. tough guy speak you can say it doesn't matter just win the game, but reality is the easier it is the better. I know I'd have rather played MSU than Duke in that title game.

To be the best you gotta beat the best. That isn't tough guy speak, you literally have to win the game. If you don't have the confidence to beat the best then you're a paper tiger. I don't care who we play, where we play them or how many times we play them. All of those teams are good, you're odds aren't going to shift a ton from one to the other all that much. Just win baby!

[fondybrewfan]

So what is the number everything thinks the Brewers need to get to to win the division given the remaining schedules?

 

I think if the Brewers get to 94-68 they win the division which would require they go 10-5 the rest of the way. With 12 games against sub .500 teams I think they can do it.

[KeithStone53151]

So what is the number everything thinks the Brewers need to get to to win the division given the remaining schedules?

 

I think if the Brewers get to 94-68 they win the division which would require they go 10-5 the rest of the way. With 12 games against sub .500 teams I think they can do it.

 

To feel comfortable that we will win it outright, my number is 95 and has been for over a month. I think we need to go 11-4. The Cubs are stumbling now a bit but I don't think that lasts long. The Cubs going 10-7 requires us to go 11-4 to beat them outright. Their schedule isn't exactly easy, but it gets much easier from a travel standpoint very soon. They might struggle over the next week with the reds and traveling to AZ, but after that they get a much needed day off and 2 layup series followed by what could be a very tough series against the cards. Let's say they get 2 of the next 4 and 1 of 3 in AZ. I can't see them winning less than 5 of those 7 layups. That leaves them 8-6 against the cards and probably either 10-7 or 9-8 over those 17.

 

So I think 11-4 is a safe record down the stretch to get the division. Anything worse than that and we'll need help from the cubs.

[MrTPlush]

If we go 11-4 I’d feel comfortable we will win the division...10-5 probably....9-6 maybe a chance...maybe a tie.

[tmwiese55]

But it'a all a crapshoot, right? And if it's not then those teams should be worried about playing us, not us worried about them. If this really is an elite team, then it shouldn't matter who we play.

 

But in a crapshoot there is still odds and every little bit counts. hitting a 7 is more likely than hitting a 6 or a 5. yes of course if you want to win it all you should do it regardless, but the easier the better. Take the NCAA tournament as an example. Would you rather play high seeds the whole way or a bunch of underdogs that pulled off upsets. tough guy speak you can say it doesn't matter just win the game, but reality is the easier it is the better. I know I'd have rather played MSU than Duke in that title game.

To be the best you gotta beat the best. That isn't tough guy speak, you literally have to win the game. If you don't have the confidence to beat the best then you're a paper tiger. I don't care who we play, where we play them or how many times we play them. All of those teams are good, you're odds aren't going to shift a ton from one to the other all that much. Just win baby!

 

OK. Keep telling yourself you'd rather play Boston, Houston, or Cleveland in the WS instead of Oakland. I'll keep preferring to play the easier team. I might be crazy, but when we played the Nationals I was happy we didn't have to face Scherzer and Strasburg. Apparently you would have preferred to see Max. Would you rather win the division or get the WC? It really shouldn't matter, just win.

[82brewcrew82]

OK. Keep telling yourself you'd rather play Boston, Houston, or Cleveland in the WS instead of Oakland. I'll keep preferring to play the easier team. I might be crazy, but when we played the Nationals I was happy we didn't have to face Scherzer and Strasburg. Apparently you would have preferred to see Max. Would you rather win the division or get the WC? It really shouldn't matter, just win.

Of course I want them to win the division. Wining the division means there is a strong likelihood that we play either the Cubs or Dodgers in the first round. But yeah, bring on the best and if any team in the playoffs doesn't believe they can beat anyone, they won't be there long anyway.

[adambr2]

Of course the team should believe that. It doesn't mean that, realistically, there isn't a path of least resistance.

 

I'm all about the odds. I want the best possible chance. Maybe some day when the Brewers have rattled off a few championships, I'll care about style points, but in the meantime when it's never happened, I'll gladly take it against whoever. The champagne won't be any less bubbly and the championship ceremony any less glorious if we beat the Braves and A's instead of the Cubs and Red Sox.

[82brewcrew82]

Of course the team should believe that. It doesn't mean that, realistically, there isn't a path of least resistance.

 

I'm all about the odds. I want the best possible chance. Maybe some day when the Brewers have rattled off a few championships, I'll care about style points, but in the meantime when it's never happened, I'll gladly take it against whoever. The champagne won't be any less bubbly and the championship ceremony any less glorious if we beat the Braves and A's instead of the Cubs and Red Sox.

I agree the whole topic is a bit "splitting hairs". I don't think there is a significant change of odds between the Red Sox and A's but you can't tell me it wouldn't be just a little bit sweeter taking down the Cubs and Red Sox on the way.

[MrTPlush]

I thought about how great it would be to take this team (old has beens and average players playing great) etc. and then go on to defeat the Cardinals, Cubs, whoever, and whoever.

 

Beating the Cubs/Cards on the way would be pure greatness.

[tmwiese55]

Dodgers article relatedd to the discussion that has taken place here and generally why we shouldn't want them in the playoffs

 

https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/9/13/17855124/los-angeles-dodgers-national-league-favorite-playoffs-world-series

[MoreTrife]

Cub's Strop likely out for playoffs, at least early rounds, per Nightengale

[jjfanec]

Cub's Strop likely out for playoffs, at least early rounds, per Nightengale

 

That bullpen is going to be crushed. Edwards is struggling right now. Cishek is their best reliever, maybe Wilson or even Chavez, but this a weak bullpen. Soria and Knebel would be closers for the Cubs right now.

[MrTPlush]

Might not have gotten help in the divisional race, but we are going to nudge our magic number down to 15 for both the Cards and Dodgers. Now four games up on both we are likely to be hosting some October baseball.

 

Hopefully more than one game.

[Ennder]

I have watched a ton of Cubs games this season and I could not be less impressed by them. It seems like every night the other team is making 2 or 3 errors and then losing the strike zone to let them back in games. Everyone seems to think they have under-performed but from watching the games I feel like they have at least 6 or 7 wins more than they deserve on the year.

[adambr2]

I hate the second wild card. It's crap that you can now be better than a team for a 162 game season and have it all taken away in one single game. If you have one bad day, none of the 162 now matters.

 

I realize that I seem very biased on this because of the position we are in but I said the same things when they introduced the second wild card.

[RollieTime]

I hate the second wild card. It's crap that you can now be better than a team for a 162 game season and have it all taken away in one single game. If you have one bad day, none of the 162 now matters.

 

I realize that I seem very biased on this because of the position we are in but I said the same things when they introduced the second wild card.

 

I agree completely! Having a one game playoff after playing 162 games really does not make much sense. Any team can beat another team on any given day in baseball. I feel like a 3 game series would make a lot more sense, but doing this and preventing other teams from playing for an extended amount of time would most likely never happen.

 

I am interested in seeing if the Yankees lose in the Wild Card Game, especially if they win around 100 games. The media will have a field day with how “questionable” the Wild Card Game truly is if the Yankees lost. Sadly, I only see MLB making a drastic change if a big market team like that loses after how successful they were during the regular season. Time will tell.

[dlk9s]

The teams should at least be re-seeded.

[obobo55new]

The way I look at it is for the 2nd wildcard team, a single game playoff is better than not getting in at all. Fir the #1 wild card, you get the game at home and far more likely to be able to setup your rotation to put forth your best SP. That is a lot in your favor.

 

Either WC team should be at a disadvantage to their.opponent which actually won a division. Because the schedule is unbalanced, reseeding based on record is silly.

[Ennder]

I hate the second wild card. It's crap that you can now be better than a team for a 162 game season and have it all taken away in one single game. If you have one bad day, none of the 162 now matters.

 

I realize that I seem very biased on this because of the position we are in but I said the same things when they introduced the second wild card.

 

It puts a lot more value on winning your division which should be a huge advantage. The Wild Card should be a harder path to winning a World Series and in the past it wasn't, now it is. This is one of the better changes they have made.

 

Also teams play different schedules, being better by a game or two over 162 really means nothing at all. If there is a 20 game gap between teams I get your point but most of the time it is 2 or 3 games and that is nothing. If you want the highest chance to win in the playoffs win your division, every team has plenty of time to accomplish that.

[TURBO]

Probably not feasible to work in the schedule, but at the very least, that WC game should be best of 3 series...

[adambr2]

I hate the second wild card. It's crap that you can now be better than a team for a 162 game season and have it all taken away in one single game. If you have one bad day, none of the 162 now matters.

 

I realize that I seem very biased on this because of the position we are in but I said the same things when they introduced the second wild card.

 

It puts a lot more value on winning your division which should be a huge advantage. The Wild Card should be a harder path to winning a World Series and in the past it wasn't, now it is. This is one of the better changes they have made.

 

Also teams play different schedules, being better by a game or two over 162 really means nothing at all. If there is a 20 game gap between teams I get your point but most of the time it is 2 or 3 games and that is nothing. If you want the highest chance to win in the playoffs win your division, every team has plenty of time to accomplish that.

 

No, I disagree, I think it was one of the worst changes they have made. 4 playoff teams made a lot of sense and they really watered things down further, and reducing a 162 game season to 1 game makes no sense to me. The format punishes teams without a true ace (us) and rewards teams that might be lesser overall but have one or two TOR starters. At this point they might as well go to the NFL 6 team format and just give byes to the top 2 division winners and have the other 4 teams play a best of 3 in the WC round.

 

You say division winners should receive a huge advantage -- why? Why should they have a 50% better chance? In what other professional sports league are division winners afforded that much of an advantage? The NFL has 2 bye teams. Other than that, your advantage is homecourt. In every professional sport.

 

The Indians have won 8 and 9 less games than the A's and Yankees, respectively. And it's not enough for them to be in the playoffs, you think they should be entitled to a huge advantage? Based on what, exactly?

[dlk9s]

I guarantee that if the Brewers are the first Wild Card and lose, national media doesn't bat an eye (in fact, the narrative will be "They had to come back down to earth sometime."). But if the Yankees are the first Wild Card and lose, national media starts talking about reworking the playoff seeding or something.

 

I certainly appreciate the current Wild Card format and understand its benefits (hell, it might get us into the playoffs), but the one-game Wild Card playoff isn't fair to really good teams that are unlucky because they happen to be in a division with the best team in the league.

 

The AL is a little unusual this year (I say this without studying historic standings, maybe it's not unusual) in that there are four teams that are head and shoulders above everyone and are split between two divisions. Thus, there will obviously be a couple excellent teams in the Wild Card game.

[rickh150]

First, balance the schedule so every team plays every team in baseball each year.

Division games- 56 games

League games (other than division) 60 games

Opposite league games 46

 

Brewers would play the Cubs and other division rivals 14 times a year.

Brewers would play every other NL team 6 times, one series home and one away

Brew would face AL teams one series each year.

 

This would make wins and losses more comparable out of division and league.

 

Second, keep the format the same. I like the emphasis on winning a division to get out of playing the 50/50 Wild Card game. Yet, and in the opposite direction as it stands now, the Wild Card team can never get the home field in the division or league home field advantage. The WC could have a 100 win season! Change that. Go by best record. That would take away the negative of the best team in each league possibly playing against the second best team record wise from the same division in a 5 game Division League Series.

 

Finally, have the flexibility built into the schedule to start a round of the playoffs a day or two early if the division or league playoffs all end early. This is probably a pipe dream for various reasons, but the dead time in between baseball series (especially basketball series) is too long at times.