Playoff Picture for 2021

[owbc]

Those saying the Dodgers "got unlucky" this season seem to forget that the Nationals traded the returning World Series Champion Dodgers both a NL MVP Candidate (Trea Turner) and NL CY Young Candidate (Max Scherzer) for a bag full of magic beans.

 

They got unlucky because they won 106 games and didn't get a division title.

[tmwiese55]

Dodgers also lost May to TJ surgery early, Bauer/Kershaw for about half the year. Granted, if Bauer is there maybe Scherzer trade doesn't happen but who knows. Then throw in Seager out along time, Bellinger falling apart, think Betts was out a while too. Don't get me wrong, I don't feel sorry for them, but generally speaking they did have a lot of bad 'luck or breaks' and still won that many games. It's absurd how loaded they are. Generally I'm glad this WC happened to them just to maybe balance the playing field a bit for everyone else.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Those saying the Dodgers "got unlucky" this season seem to forget that the Nationals traded the returning World Series Champion Dodgers both a NL MVP Candidate (Trea Turner) and NL CY Young Candidate (Max Scherzer) for a bag full of magic beans.

 

They got unlucky because they won 106 games and didn't get a division title.

 

If they wanted a division title instead of the Giants maybe they should have won the season series against them....Giants won that 10-9 in head to head matchups, and wound up winning the division by that 1 game in the standings.

 

I discount total # of wins for teams in different divisions because of how the schedule is weighted to inter-divisional matchups and discrepancies with interleague opponents. NL Central and NL East teams didn't have the benefit of padding their W-L records against the Dbacks (worst team in the NL) by playing them almost 20 times. Sure, the NL Central and East may not have had top heavy teams capable of winning 100 games - although I'd argue the Brewers could have gotten there had they not been cruise control the last two weeks of the season if they really needed 5 more W's.

[Underachiever]

Dodgers shouldn't have lost the season series to SF. 10-9 series win in favor of the Giants was the exact margin for the division. Flip one game. SF also had a better record against AZ (17-2 to 16-3), and Colorado (15-4 vs 13-6). They would have more cause to complain if they were staying home for the playoffs, as second-place teams did for 100+ years.

 

Brewers would have made the playoffs a few times in the past if the wild card existed. That AL East was tough sledding. Would have loved to see that '92 team get a chance. Eldred would have thrown 500 pitches every game and won the World Series by himself. Okay, maybe Bosio and Wegman could have pitched a few innings.

 

Edit: Dang it, Chorizo, I shouldn't have waited so long to hit "submit".

[logan82]

I hate the one game wildcard play-in game. Make it one wild card team and have them play their division winner regardless of record.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Personally like the play-in game and think it was an ingenious, fast, convenient way of making more of a very long regular season worth watching.

[tmwiese55]

Agree with OSS. My gut when it was announced was against it due to 1 game being kind of against how baseball is, but as its played out I've totally come around to it and think it makes a ton of sense. A very minor addition/tweak that brings way more teams involved to finish the season and making teams play it out for the division. Maybe could tweak something for this situation of WC1 being ahead of WC2 by X amount of game, IDK, but that gets quirky too.

[endaround]

Well if MLB wanted to a way make the one game Wild Card game even more random and potentially unfair, they found it!. Joe West is behind the plate for the NL Wild Card.

 

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/32338710/record-breaking-umpire-joe-west-retire-postseason

[igor67]

I love it and the NL West is a perfect example of the benefit. Even when the Padres were still in it, the advantage of not having the 1 game playoff was a huge incentive to keep playing for all the teams involved. The Brewers were very much the exception with having a bunch of meaningless games. With the old wildcard format everyone but the NL East would have been coasting by mid September, and the Brewers even earlier if the Cards decided they never really had anything to play for. I very much like that teams are rewarded for being the best over the long season.

[SRB]

Getting to and winning the World Series is always going to have an element of luck/fortune. If you wanted to eliminate that element, then the World Series Champion would just be whichever team finishes the 162-game season in first place, which would not have been the Dodgers this year. (Of course that involves luck/fortune too, but you know what I mean)

[Patrick425]

As for making the wild card a 3-game series...I don't see a good reason to do it.

 

How about that one game is not enough to prove who is the better team and who deserves to advance. Shouldn't that be the goal of the playoffs? I understand that a 3, 5, or even 7 game series is not perfect either, but it's a lot better than 1 game. The Dodgerd have 106 wins and the 2nd best record in baseball and face the possibility of getting eliminated in one game? That makes zero sense to me. I feel like if the Brewers were in this situation and then lost that game, a lot of people on this site would suddenly not feel as "excited" about the 1 game showdown.

 

Baseball lends itself to upsets more than any other sport. There is not really such a thing as a "huge upset" in baseball. Arizona can beat the Dodgers in one game. Does that mean they are a better team? That's the reason they play 162 games and not 81 or 17. You shouldn't be expected to play a 162 game schedule to prove you belong in the playoffs and then have your fate decided by one game. The Wild Card game is not a "play-in" game, it's part of the play-offs and should be treated as such.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

As for making the wild card a 3-game series...I don't see a good reason to do it.

 

How about that one game is not enough to prove who is the better team and who deserves to advance.

 

They get 162 to win their division - that is their shot at a berth for being the most consistent over the course of the season. Neither one did.

 

If we're this hung up on that, may as well just pick the best record from each league and do the World Series.

[Patrick425]

Well if MLB wanted to a way make the one game Wild Card game even more random and potentially unfair, they found it!. Joe West is behind the plate for the NL Wild Card.

 

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/32338710/record-breaking-umpire-joe-west-retire-postseason

 

Ughh...that makes me so angry. Proof that there is zero accountability for umpires. It's a lifetime job no matter how horrible you are at it. We expect that MLB, for the most part, represents the 700-800 best players in the world. Why is there not the same expectations for Umpires?

[Patrick425]

As for making the wild card a 3-game series...I don't see a good reason to do it.

 

How about that one game is not enough to prove who is the better team and who deserves to advance.

 

They get 162 to win their division - that is their shot at a berth for being the most consistent over the course of the season. Neither one did.

 

If we're this hung up on that, may as well just pick the best record from each league and do the World Series.

 

Yes, but is it the Dodger's fault that they were in the Western division rather than the Central or Eastern division? So if you are an good team in a weak division, you deserve to make the playoffs more than a Great team in a really strong division?

[OldSchoolSnapper]

It is nobody's "fault," it is a sport. Many other sports operate this way. The divisions serve a good purpose regional play and winning one should be worth something. If the alternative is that a division champion that wins 94 games doesn't make the playoffs because of a wild card that won 100, I think that's worse than what we have, personally. I'd also be against re-seeding the teams so that the Dodgers get a 2 seed.

[tmwiese55]

Right, its fair because it's agree upon by everyone going in. Yes, LAD is on the short end of the stick now but they could be benefactors in a different year. In theory, over time that will all balance.

 

Plus, due to being in divisions and schedules not being equal that throws a wrench in basing everything off records vs other divisions or the other league. Take MKE in 2011 with a division of tanking teams in CHC, Hous, Pit just handing them wins. There's countless examples of that over the years as well. Long story, the competition between SF and LAD for the division (and all divisions) are a fair competition with as close to equal schedules as possible (interleague being the only quirk) and LA lost. Plus they lost head to head vs SF.

 

Also, MKE and CHC in 2018 were in the same boat as LAD/SF are now as the two best teams but having to do this play in game then the loser to the WC game. Maybe it happened but I don't recall a mass discussion on how the system needs to end. So, essentially LAD benefitted from this in the other direction just 3 years ago.

[MrTPlush]

I don't understand why they are unable to post game times for the NLDS and ALDS yet? I understand that the outcomes of the wild card games may determine some of those game times (although, since they know who the home teams are regardless of the WC game results, not sure why that really matters). However, I'm sure they determined the game time already based on different scenarios of wild card results. Why not just share those possible scenarios with the public? For now, based on geography and national interest, I'm going to assume the Brewers/Braves game will be an afternoon game on Friday. Do we really have to wait until after the WC game on Wednesday to get this information?

 

It is completely ridiculous and once again proof that TV ratings drive everything.

 

I mean yah...it is a business trying to make money. I don't know why anyone would expect something different.

[monty57]

The biggest reason for the second Wild Card team is to keep more cities excited about baseball in September. Without the second WC team, the Dodgers/Giants would have run away with the Wild Card spot very early, so a team like the Cardinals may have sold at the deadline rather than feeling they had a chance. I'm sure the MLB made a lot more money by having some extra teams playing for that second WC spot than they would have made without the second WC spot.

 

I'd rather just have one WC spot, but for the reason mentioned above I don't see the league dropping the second spot. As it stands, the Brewers (and everyone else) have to wait almost a week before their first game. Players are used to their routine, so this can really throw them off. A three or five game Wild Card series would make this much worse. You'd probably have teams bringing up their AAA teams just to play some scrimmages between the end of the season and the first round of playoffs just to keep them sharp.

 

When you also throw in that they're currently playing World Series games in freezing temperatures and snow, I'm out on adding any more playoff teams / rounds to the current structure.

[Fear The Chorizo]

If they want to stick with a 162 game regular season, then I think their current playoff format is about the best they can do - there's just not enough time on the calendar to add more games to a WC round, and I like the fact that each league has 5 teams making the postseason as I think it limits how many teams are in perpetual rebuilding/tank mode.

 

I also really like the fact the wild card teams get put in a disadvantage for the 5 game divisional set against what is presumably the top seed in each league right after a 1 game WC round - at least in terms of a quick travel schedule and not having their pitching staff fully lined up and rested. It really does put a premium on winning your division and prioritizing the regular season. If winning a division wasn't a big deal to optimize postseason success, both the Giants and Dodgers wouldn't have pushed all the way to the end of the year, same as the Brewers and Cubs in 2018.

[IIAY]

Most playoff appearances in the last 15 seasons:

 

11 Dodgers

10 Yankees

9 Cardinals

8 Red Sox

 

Two of these four will be gone before the divisional playoffs, and I can't say that I'll be shedding tears for any of them.

[Patrick425]

It really does put a premium on winning your division and prioritizing the regular season.

 

I would argue just the opposite. The team that won 106 games in the regular season and has the 2nd best record in ALL of baseball is playing one game against a team that won 90 games to determine their fate. On top of that, if they win, then they go on to play the team with the best record instead of reranking based on regular season records. Seems to me like the regular season really is not being prioritized at all. They didn't win 16 more games than the Cards because of an "unbalanced" schedule where they play teams in their division more. In fact, I would argue that they would have won more games if they were in the East or Central. The West is clearly the strongest division in the NL.

 

I'm not shedding any tears for LA and I also think having WC teams is great. In fact I have issues with the current financial structure in MLB and big market TV contracts, but that's a different discussion. I'm trying to look at it objectively and I think a team with the 2nd best record in baseball deserves more than a 1 game playoff. Saying that it "evens out" over the years seems like an admission that it is sometimes not fair to certain teams. So, why not attempt to fix it or make it better rather than assuming it will all even out. Again, 3 games is not perfect either, but it's so much better than 1 game. At least then you have to show some pitching depth. Yes, that would probably require shortening the regular season, but I think its worth it.

[JRob1125]

I think a best 2 of 3 would be perfect. All three games @ wild card #1.

[owbc]

As for making the wild card a 3-game series...I don't see a good reason to do it.

 

How about that one game is not enough to prove who is the better team and who deserves to advance. Shouldn't that be the goal of the playoffs? I understand that a 3, 5, or even 7 game series is not perfect either, but it's a lot better than 1 game. The Dodgerd have 106 wins and the 2nd best record in baseball and face the possibility of getting eliminated in one game? That makes zero sense to me. I feel like if the Brewers were in this situation and then lost that game, a lot of people on this site would suddenly not feel as "excited" about the 1 game showdown.

 

Baseball lends itself to upsets more than any other sport. There is not really such a thing as a "huge upset" in baseball. Arizona can beat the Dodgers in one game. Does that mean they are a better team? That's the reason they play 162 games and not 81 or 17. You shouldn't be expected to play a 162 game schedule to prove you belong in the playoffs and then have your fate decided by one game. The Wild Card game is not a "play-in" game, it's part of the play-offs and should be treated as such.

 

The playoffs are mostly about entertainment. We already know that the Rays, Dodgers, and Giants are the three best teams in MLB. If this was college football, the "committee" would advance them to the semifinals. However, if you value the regular season, then the Dodgers already "lost" to the Giants and therefore should be eliminated. So it's really a gift by MLB to even give them a chance. And if they're going to throw a bone to second place teams, you may as well make it as entertaining as possible. The wild card games are awesome, they are by far the safest guarantee of an entertaining, must-see MLB game. It's a win-win because you are not involving the division winners and you are still entertaining the fans and giving the Dodgers another chance. The Dodgers already lost to the Giants--they lost the season series and they lost the division. The Giants are the better team over 162 games. A 7-game series will not change that, but it would provide us with a ton of entertainment, and potentially a different outcome because the postseason is different than the regular season and everyone optimizes their rosters to win in the postseason. It's just more fun. So in my view the single-game wild card is a perfect balance of rewarding the best regular season teams and entertaining the fans.

[monty57]

It really does put a premium on winning your division and prioritizing the regular season.

 

I would argue just the opposite. The team that won 106 games in the regular season and has the 2nd best record in ALL of baseball is playing one game against a team that won 90 games to determine their fate. On top of that, if they win, then they go on to play the team with the best record instead of reranking based on regular season records. Seems to me like the regular season really is not being prioritized at all. They didn't win 16 more games than the Cards because of an "unbalanced" schedule where they play teams in their division more. In fact, I would argue that they would have won more games if they were in the East or Central. The West is clearly the strongest division in the NL.

 

I'm not shedding any tears for LA and I also think having WC teams is great. In fact I have issues with the current financial structure in MLB and big market TV contracts, but that's a different discussion. I'm trying to look at it objectively and I think a team with the 2nd best record in baseball deserves more than a 1 game playoff. Saying that it "evens out" over the years seems like an admission that it is sometimes not fair to certain teams. So, why not attempt to fix it or make it better rather than assuming it will all even out. Again, 3 games is not perfect either, but it's so much better than 1 game. At least then you have to show some pitching depth. Yes, that would probably require shortening the regular season, but I think its worth it.

 

If the goal is to make the regular season "count more," then we they would have to go back to two divisions (East & West), or maybe even just one division in each league (one AL, one NL), with the winner of the division playing in the World Series.

 

There will always be stronger divisions and weaker divisions, so as long as we have divisions (and expanded playoffs) some teams will get "robbed" while others will "sneak in." There is no perfect playoff format, but there is cold and snow as the year goes on so the playoffs can't really get any longer than they are unless the season is shortened.

[tmwiese55]

Yes, that post was totally illogical. The only way to eliminate these type of issues of this nature would be to eliminate divisions and balance schedules. Otherwise there's going to be quirks that come up once in a while, like happened this year. But at that point, then why even have the playoffs, you've determined the best team over 162 already. Skip to the WS like they used to. The same complaint of why does team with this many more wins have to play team with less would apply to a lot of years where a 100ish win team plays a 90ish.

 

I could see something though like if WC1 is say 12 games better than WC2 then the game doesn't need to happen being something added just in case this happens again. But either way, if the WC is 2nd best record are we gonna stomp our feet that it's not fair they have to be the 4 seed instead of a division winner with less, where does it end?

 

Seems to me that BCS system is what we now want for baseball hahaha, I kid. But in reality it was probably the most accurate post season system (maybe NBA) of best team actually winning the title.