As we enter the final week, the 2017 regular season was not very...........

[WeatherWonk]

............interesting, in terms of division races or WC races. It has been a year devoid of any real good races.

Three of the six division races ALW, NLW, NLE, were basically decided by late August. One other (ALC) took about 10 days more. The final two (NLC, ALE), while not mathematically wrapped up, are realistically wrapped up, as this week starts.

Under the old WC format, where only one WC team was admitted, the NL and AL WC entrants would also have been decided before this last week. Even with the new format, there is really only one race left. That's for the 2nd NL WC. COL has a 2 game lead on MIL and 2.5 on STL.

Probably the most interesting race left in this last week is the race for the best record in each league AND the overall best record in MLB. Only one game separates the Dodgers and the Indians, overall. The Indians have a three game lead on the Astros in the AL. And the Dodgers have a five game lead on the Nationals in the NL.

One overlooked aspect of the new deciding factor in the World Series this year (team with the best record gets home field advantage) is the idea that IF teams with the best overall record dont make it to the WS, the best overall record between the two teams still decides home field advantage. That is a big incentive to keep winning, especially for, say, the Yankees, the D-backs, the Cubs and possibly Colorado. If any of those teams face each other in the WS, best record still comes into play.

BTW, if the two teams have the SAME record in the WS, the tie-breakers are head-to-head and then inter-division record, in that order.

[WeatherWonk]

Cubs pounding STL. If the Rockies win, the Cards become a real longshot for the WC.

[Jeff Fletcher]

I don't think any team really cares about home field advantage. They're not going to throw games, but they won't put forth any more effort (ie, at the expense of being fresh for the playoffs) to get home field than they would if it were locked up. 

I think getting the No 1 seed in each league is significant because it means you play a WC team that's already used one it's best starting pitchers. 

I bet if you asked teams if they'd rather be the road team against the wild card or be the home team against another division winner, they play the wild card. 

[yk9001]

The season is a month too long.

There wasn't one thing solved at season end that couldn't have been solved the week before Labor Day.

[Angel Oracle]

I'd settle for eliminating the 2nd WC.  It's stupid having essentially a one game playoff in each league EVERY season!

MLB was doing fine before the 2nd WC spot was added.

[yk9001]

9 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

I'd settle for eliminating the 2nd WC.  It's stupid having essentially a one game playoff in each league EVERY season!

MLB was doing fine before the 2nd WC spot was added.

On the other hand, having the two wcs have to play a 'play in' game makes winning a division title more valuable.  Which it should.

Here's the bottom line - the Angels are two games under .500 and technically still alive with a week to go in the season.  

This is horseshit.  A sub .500 team shouldn't be in a playoff hunt.  You can dress this up that the Angels are playing 'important games' in September, but its lipstick on a pig.  Very few except diehards care.  And its borne out by the attendance last homestand.

[axalar]

3 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

I'd settle for eliminating the 2nd WC.  It's stupid having essentially a one game playoff in each league EVERY season!

MLB was doing fine before the 2nd WC spot was added.

Doubt the marketing/business teams for the 3-4 teams in the hunt for the 2nd WC the last few weeks would agree with that statement. Baseball is a business, remember.

[Angel Oracle]

Baseball is the last of the purist major sports.   Too many post-season teams waters down regular season play.

One of the very few things I ever disagreed with Coach Wooden on was his thought that every NCAA D-1 team should take part in the NCAAT.   With that, why bother to have a regular season?  

[Ohtaniland]

7 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

Baseball is the last of the purist major sports.   Too many post-season teams waters down regular season play.

One of the very few things I ever disagreed with Coach Wooden on was his thought that every NCAA D-1 team should take part in the NCAAT.   With that, why bother to have a regular season?  

Maybe because of Trout MLB will grant us an at-large playoff bid.

If not, we'll certainly be the favorites in the NIT.

[Lou]

1 hour ago, Calzone said:

If not, we'll certainly be the favorites in the NIT.

We're #11!  We're #11!  We're #11! 

[Pujols4MVP]

What if they removed 5 games from the regular season from each team & add another round to the playoffs with a total of 8 playoff teams in each league ? First two rounds would be best of 5 games, then 7 games for the last two. This system would guarentee Trout sees the playoffs.

[WeatherWonk]

22 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I don't think any team really cares about home field advantage. They're not going to throw games, but they won't put forth any more effort (ie, at the expense of being fresh for the playoffs) to get home field than they would if it were locked up. 

I think getting the No 1 seed in each league is significant because it means you play a WC team that's already used one it's best starting pitchers. 

I bet if you asked teams if they'd rather be the road team against the wild card or be the home team against another division winner, they play the wild card. 

Which has me wondering...............what if a team that emerged from the WC game, beat the team with the best record in their league, and then drew a team with a worse regular season record than them? Would the WC team get the HF advantage? Or does it automatically go to the division winner?

 

[Jeff Fletcher]

3 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

Which has me wondering...............what if a team that emerged from the WC game, beat the team with the best record in their league, and then drew a team with a worse regular season record than them? Would the WC team get the HF advantage? Or does it automatically go to the division winner?

 

A wild card team can never have home field unless it's against another WC team with a worse record. 

[Adam]

As disappointing and as 90's-esque as this September has been, the Angels outplayed my expectations. It was fun being excited to watch games into September.

 

 

[Vegas Halo Fan]

22 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

I'd settle for eliminating the 2nd WC.  It's stupid having essentially a one game playoff in each league EVERY season!

MLB was doing fine before the 2nd WC spot was added.

The bad thing about it (aside from its finality after one game, which is asinine) is that two cities every year have a team that makes the playoffs and they may never get to see them in postseason play.

[arch stanton]

The divisions have all been foregone conclusions since the day the Cubs finally passed the Brewers in the standings. Without the AL wildcard race there wouldn't have been much suspense at all

[Adam]

Love the Wild Card format as it is. So great.

[Angels#1Fan]

45 minutes ago, Adam said:

As disappointing and as 90's-esque as this September has been, the Angels outplayed my expectations. It was fun being excited to watch games into September.

 

 

I agree.

Even though the season wound up bad it was at least entertaining in terms of the Angels being in the hunt most of the way.

[Jeff Fletcher]

1 hour ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

The bad thing about it (aside from its finality after one game, which is asinine) is that two cities every year have a team that makes the playoffs and they may never get to see them in postseason play.

I like the one game. The problem with having one wild card was that wild card really went into the playoffs with no disadvantage compared to a team that had won its division. There had been seasons in which 2 teams were close for the division title, but there was little incentive for either to win because both were going to the playoffs. 

Also, as I've said many times, the purpose of the playoffs is not to identify the best team. The purpose of the playoffs is to create excitement (and TV ratings) which comes from significant importance hinging on small samples of games. That's why people watch. 

[WeatherWonk]

1 hour ago, arch stanton said:

The divisions have all been foregone conclusions since the day the Cubs finally passed the Brewers in the standings. Without the AL wildcard race there wouldn't have been much suspense at all

Not so fast. The AL East has suddenly become not so certain. Toronto has beaten the Red Sox two best hurlers on consecutive nights. They can certainly beat Porcello. If the Yankees win behind Severino, it's down to two games with three to play. The Red Sox then draw the Astros and the Astros are still in the hunt for the best AL record. The Yanks draw the Blue Jays.

Suddenly, Boston's starting pitching is not looking so good. Sale would be scheduled to pitch on OCT 1, if they honor his normal rotation, but I imagine Farrell will hold him back, if their seeding is in the bag. But if it isnt, tough decision for Farrell. What if the Sox are tied with the Yankees, going into the final game? What if they only have a one game lead? Very tough decision for Farrell.

From the perspective of the Twins, the Astros and/or the Indians, there might not be a better scenario than the Sox and the Yanks finishing in a tie and having to play a one-game playoff. They would both probably burn their best pitcher for that game. It's a bit tricky for a tie to happen, with an odd number lead and an even number of games (or vice versa) left. But it could happen.

It's conceivable that the Red Sox could enter the ALDS (assuming a regular season tie, a one-game playoff they lose and then the WC game they win) having to start that series with their #3 starter, whomever that is. Probably Porcello. The AL WC game starts on the 3rd. 

Couldnt happen to a nicer team...............I love rooting against the Red Sox.

[Jobu]

44 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The problem with having one wild card was that wild card really went into the playoffs with no disadvantage compared to a team that had won its division. 

The flip side is that, on numerous occasions, the wild card team has been better than at least 1 division winner in the league. If you view it as a counterbalance for an unbalanced schedule that allows mediocre division winners to beat up on terrible teams, it makes some sense not to penalize the wild card winner.

Not that I have issue with the current format, but it's always felt a little artificial to me - trying to force a dramatic finish that only happened rarely in the previous system. Yes, the Angels had a more meaningful September than expected, but that wasn't a function of their level of play, which has been narrowly orbiting .500 all season. It was more that everyone else was just so bad that they fell away from the pack, and the Twins weren't good enough to really run away with it. It's probably working in the NL, though.

[WeatherWonk]

7 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

A wild card team can never have home field unless it's against another WC team with a worse record. 

Unless it's the World Series, correct?

I cut and pasted this from the MLB article regarding the new CBA.

"Home-field advantage in the World Series will be awarded to the Club with the higher winning percentage in the Championship Season, rather than based on the outcome of the All-Star Game."

It IS conceivable that the D-Backs could have a better record than the AL East winner. It is conceivable that the Yankees could have a better record than the Cubs.

[WeatherWonk]

Red Sox fell behind 3-0, but it is 9-4 Boston in the 3rd. 

Has Toronto gone wire-to-wire in last place? Gawd, what underachievers they were, this year.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

10 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I like the one game. The problem with having one wild card was that wild card really went into the playoffs with no disadvantage compared to a team that had won its division. There had been seasons in which 2 teams were close for the division title, but there was little incentive for either to win because both were going to the playoffs. 

Also, as I've said many times, the purpose of the playoffs is not to identify the best team. The purpose of the playoffs is to create excitement (and TV ratings) which comes from significant importance hinging on small samples of games. That's why people watch. 

You could serve the same purpose with a best-of-three, which would ensure that the fans in each city get to see their team play at least one game. The wild card teams would have to burn through most of their rotation to survive that.

Baseball isn't a sport that lends itself well to a one-game playoff, IMO.

[Jeff Fletcher]

2 hours ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

You could serve the same purpose with a best-of-three, which would ensure that the fans in each city get to see their team play at least one game. The wild card teams would have to burn through most of their rotation to survive that.

Baseball isn't a sport that lends itself well to a one-game playoff, IMO.

There's not that much difference between 1 game and best of 3. You can't have the division winners waiting so long to play a best of 3.