SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
MLB plotting playoff expansion — with reality TV twist
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 11, 2020 14:57:09 GMT -5
I mean, it sucks that he roots for an incompetent team? They don't lack resources, they've just been poorly run. Yeah, and what would really be the harm if somewhere in that run of bad management, Felix Hernandez got to start a postseason game? Think of how unfair it would be to all those Seattle fans to have to sit through that, knowing they team didn't really earn it. Thankfully they were spared that hardship. They probably would've started Erik Bedard.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,765
|
Post by mobaz on Feb 11, 2020 14:57:28 GMT -5
If expansion to 7 teams is a must, I'd like to see a tweak: give all three division winners the "bye" straight to the ALDS, and make the four WC teams play two rounds of single game eliminations (3 games total in each league). The best WC team vs the worst, and the #2 v #3 seed. The winners move on to the next single elimination game against each other, with the winner earning a trip to the ALDS. At the conclusion of that game, the #1 division winner will choose their ALDS opponent (likely the WC winner) live. Then, expand the ALDS from 5 to 7 games. This format would give more teams contending September baseball, it'd put even more importance on winning your division, and it'd make the ALDS less flukey (5 games vs 7). It waters down the Wild Card for sure, but the trade off is worth it imo while understanding the arguments of those opposed to it entirely. There are still Yankees fans who complain about 04 because the wild card Red Sox team wouldn't have even made the playoffs under the old format. I could maybe kinda get behind that. If I had to.
|
|
|
Post by baseballlifer34 on Feb 11, 2020 14:58:34 GMT -5
They're a midmarket team, by all definitions. Their playoff aspirations are already trimmed down to the margins by that standard. Low payroll teams have even less margin for error. The top payroll teams should be there 75 percent of the time if they're spending money correctly. That's not always the case, but the system should allow for more parity and this is one of the best ways to combat that. They could become Rays fans, who do far more with far less. They could use the fans. The Rays have been to the postseason 6 times in their brief 22 year period. Which really lengthens my point.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 11, 2020 15:03:22 GMT -5
Yeah, and what would really be the harm if somewhere in that run of bad management, Felix Hernandez got to start a postseason game? Think of how unfair it would be to all those Seattle fans to have to sit through that, knowing they team didn't really earn it. Thankfully they were spared that hardship. They probably would've started Erik Bedard. I don't understand how everyone went from blind acceptance of the totally artificial financial constraints that "forced" a trade of Mookie Betts, to being completely head in the sand about what MLB's actual job is here. They're trying to provide a compelling experience to fans, not satisfy some high-minded ideal about who deserves to win a championship. When you're filling out your brackets next month with everyone in your office, you can remind yourself how much the average fan really loves and demands a statistically sound method of determining a league champion.
|
|
|
Post by baseballlifer34 on Feb 11, 2020 15:06:44 GMT -5
They could become Rays fans, who do far more with far less. They could use the fans. The Rays have been to the postseason 6 times in their brief 22 year period. Which really lengthens my point. In contrast the Red Sox have been to the postseason 11 times since 1999. The Yankees have been to the postseason even more than that in this time period. That's more than double even what the smart Rays could do. Add- The only way to add more parity is to add more play-off teams.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 11, 2020 15:06:59 GMT -5
They are trying to provide a league where no one loses because most modern "fans" only care about winners.
|
|
|
Post by baseballlifer34 on Feb 11, 2020 15:13:41 GMT -5
They probably would've started Erik Bedard. I don't understand how everyone went from blind acceptance of the totally artificial financial constraints that "forced" a trade of Mookie Betts, to being completely head in the sand about what MLB's actual job is here. They're trying to provide a compelling experience to fans, not satisfy some high-minded ideal about who deserves to win a championship. When you're filling out your brackets next month with everyone in your office, you can remind yourself how much the average fan really loves and demands a statistically sound method of determining a league champion. Exactly. More revenue is what the league wants and good for them. They don't care what the 50 year old fan wants because that's what they saw back in 1980. In fact, baseball isn't listening to those fans because they in fact realize that THEY aren't the future of the sport. The future of the sport lies in the hands of the very distracted millenials who lose interest fast and get distracted by other things very fast. Innovation is the only thing that's going to keep this game more profitable. Winning and the chances of winning increases interest. Plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 11, 2020 15:15:01 GMT -5
They probably would've started Erik Bedard. I don't understand how everyone went from blind acceptance of the totally artificial financial constraints that "forced" a trade of Mookie Betts, to being completely head in the sand about what MLB's actual job is here. They're trying to provide a compelling experience to fans, not satisfy some high-minded ideal about who deserves to win a championship. When you're filling out your brackets next month with everyone in your office, you can remind yourself how much the average fan really loves and demands a statistically sound method of determining a league champion. Uhhh, I definitely do not fall into the category of accepting the financial constraints that led to the Mookie Betts trade and I think it's awful? The conspiratorial part of me also thinks that spreading out the playoff berths and trying to limit the value of excellence is a way of artificially keeping contracts down because the value added of each win becomes less consequential, especially once a team gets above like 85 wins. Maybe for players like Betts, Strasburg, real difference makers, teams will push the envelope. But it seems like spending money on marginal improvements would become much less savvy under this scheme, which would depress salaries even more. You'd end up with mid-value regulars getting non-tendered by 88-win teams so they could get out of paying like an $8 million, stuff like that. For what it's worth, I'm pretty radical on the idea of expansion and ways to tinker around with the season - I'd expand to at least 40 teams, with a 24-team major league and a 16-team relegation league. I just think this scheme specifically is bad.
|
|
|
Post by baseballlifer34 on Feb 11, 2020 15:38:17 GMT -5
I don't understand how everyone went from blind acceptance of the totally artificial financial constraints that "forced" a trade of Mookie Betts, to being completely head in the sand about what MLB's actual job is here. They're trying to provide a compelling experience to fans, not satisfy some high-minded ideal about who deserves to win a championship. When you're filling out your brackets next month with everyone in your office, you can remind yourself how much the average fan really loves and demands a statistically sound method of determining a league champion. Uhhh, I definitely do not fall into the category of accepting the financial constraints that led to the Mookie Betts trade and I think it's awful? The conspiratorial part of me also thinks that spreading out the playoff berths and trying to limit the value of excellence is a way of artificially keeping contracts down because the value added of each win becomes less consequential, especially once a team gets above like 85 wins. Maybe for players like Betts, Strasburg, real difference makers, teams will push the envelope. But it seems like spending money on marginal improvements would become much less savvy under this scheme, which would depress salaries even more. You'd end up with mid-value regulars getting non-tendered by 88-win teams so they could get out of paying like an $8 million, stuff like that. For what it's worth, I'm pretty radical on the idea of expansion and ways to tinker around with the season - I'd expand to at least 40 teams, with a 24-team major league and a 16-team relegation league. I just think this scheme specifically is bad. Wouldn't this by definition have the projected 83 win team picking up that DFA in a heartbeat? The same can be said for teams spending more also because even the bad teams will have a chance now with upgrades. I don't think this will depress salaries at all.
|
|
|
Post by baseballlifer34 on Feb 11, 2020 17:19:23 GMT -5
The Rays have been to the postseason 6 times in their brief 22 year period. Which really lengthens my point. In contrast the Red Sox have been to the postseason 11 times since 1999. The Yankees have been to the postseason even more than that in this time period. That's more than double even what the smart Rays could do. Add- The only way to add more parity is to add more play-off teams. Under this new format, only 4 total teams in the last 8 years would qualify for the playoffs with losing records.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 11, 2020 17:33:50 GMT -5
In contrast the Red Sox have been to the postseason 11 times since 1999. The Yankees have been to the postseason even more than that in this time period. That's more than double even what the smart Rays could do. Add- The only way to add more parity is to add more play-off teams. Under this new format, only 4 total teams in the last 8 years would qualify for the playoffs with losing records. And that's absurd x 4. Any bad team can beat any good team. What was the reason to have the regular season?
|
|
|
Post by baseballlifer34 on Feb 11, 2020 18:05:27 GMT -5
Under this new format, only 4 total teams in the last 8 years would qualify for the playoffs with losing records. And that's absurd x 4. Any bad team can beat any good team. What was the reason to have the regular season? To seperate the team's with losing records with winning records. To establish a number 1 seed. To establish division winners who have the right to pick opponents and have home field advantage. Those reasons. Also 27 out of the 30 teams in baseball would have made the playoffs in this time period. For more parity. That reason the most.
|
|
|
Post by baseballlifer34 on Feb 11, 2020 20:45:19 GMT -5
All TV deals outside of the World series for Fox in the postseason is up the same time the CBA is up. Fox owns the rights to the world series until 2028.
You propose something like this and expand the playoffs.
This plan won't happen as is, but the playoffs is going to change and they'll add more teams/probably expand more playoff games. I can guarantee you that.
|
|
|
Post by baseballlifer34 on Feb 12, 2020 5:34:07 GMT -5
In contrast the Red Sox have been to the postseason 11 times since 1999. The Yankees have been to the postseason even more than that in this time period. That's more than double even what the smart Rays could do. Add- The only way to add more parity is to add more play-off teams. Under this new format, only 4 total teams in the last 8 years would qualify for the playoffs with losing records. So to further dispel anyone's irrational thoughts of a 70-92 team running the table and winning the World series, it's really impossible. They wouldn't get in first of all (they would need a better record than that). Secondly, the NBA has a team with a losing record in the playoffs every year almost. The NFL has a team with a losing record in the playoffs every two to three years. This would put MLB on par with the NFL and still doing better than the NBA.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 12, 2020 9:19:37 GMT -5
But it's far more likely for teams with losing records to beat the best teams in baseball than it is in other sports, as has been said repeatedly in this thread. So that turns MLB into a joke unless you really think it's a good look for a team with a losing record to win a championship. It will happen.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 12, 2020 9:37:52 GMT -5
But it's far more likely for teams with losing records to beat the best teams in baseball than it is in other sports, as has been said repeatedly in this thread. So that turns MLB into a joke unless you really think it's a good look for a team with a losing record to win a championship. It will happen. Didn't we already cross this rubicon about three SF Giants championships ago? I don't get what everyone is being so protective about. The system hasn't put the best teams in the championship for several decades now. Honestly, there's enough things for me to be mad about. I can choose to just enjoy the big dumb sports tournament and not worry that the winner might not be the "correct" one (which by the way if the best team always won, no one would watch). Like that's a gift I can give to myself, and honestly, why wouldn't I? Because I care about the purity of a sport that isn't pure, never was pure, and, notably, doesn't matter at all?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 12, 2020 9:57:51 GMT -5
But it's far more likely for teams with losing records to beat the best teams in baseball than it is in other sports, as has been said repeatedly in this thread. So that turns MLB into a joke unless you really think it's a good look for a team with a losing record to win a championship. It will happen. Didn't we already cross this rubicon about three SF Giants championships ago? I don't get what everyone is being so protective about. The system hasn't put the best teams in the championship for several decades now. Honestly, there's enough things for me to be mad about. I can choose to just enjoy the big dumb sports tournament and not worry that the winner might not be the "correct" one (which by the way if the best team always won, no one would watch). Like that's a gift I can give to myself, and honestly, why wouldn't I? Because I care about the purity of a sport that isn't pure, never was pure, and, notably, doesn't matter at all? Your argument is that it already happens so they should make it happen far more often? The Giants at least won 88 games. The Cardinals won 83 games in 2006, and that was even before the 1 game playoff rounds. The more of these they add, the more these crappy teams are going to win. And a team with a losing record will win. To make baseball better, they might want to get rid of the division winners automatically making the playoffs so that a team with a 83-78 record doesn't get in. They shouldn't change it so that several more teams like that make the playoffs every season. I get that you don't care about this, but I do. The regular season matters most to baseball and always has. The more rounds they add to the playoffs, the less the regular season matters and the more luck matters. It turns baseball into a game of Yahtzee. In the NBA, the best team almost always wins. Are you saying no one watches?
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,787
|
Post by nomar on Feb 12, 2020 10:03:29 GMT -5
Love or hate him, Bauer pretty much nails how horrible MLB’s marketing has gotten
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 12, 2020 10:05:44 GMT -5
In the NBA, the best team almost always wins. Are you saying no one watches? March Madness has also been somewhat popular historically. So has the f'ing lottery for that matter. People do not understand and do not care about statistical probabilities or the implications thereof. I get the basis for you not liking the system, but at some point this just becomes a "uhhh, well actually, the energy density required to run the Iron Man suit would never..." nerd shit. Well, whatever, people are enjoying the movie. If you can deal with the parts that don't make sense, cool, and if you can't, go watch something you do like.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaydouble on Feb 12, 2020 10:19:49 GMT -5
In the NBA, the best team almost always wins. Are you saying no one watches? March Madness has also been somewhat popular historically. So has the f'ing lottery for that matter. People do not understand and do not care about statistical probabilities or the implications thereof. I get the basis for you not liking the system, but at some point this just becomes a "uhhh, well actually, the energy density required to run the Iron Man suit would never..." nerd shit. Well, whatever, people are enjoying the movie. If you can deal with the parts that don't make sense, cool, and if you can't, go watch something you do like. March Madness is great, and nobody cares about regular season college basketball. Of course the playoffs would be more exciting if you made it a zany tournament where everybody got to play and anybody could win, but the trade-off is that the regular season would be way less interesting. I don't think this is a worthwhile trade-off for baseball to make, because the regular season is such a core part of what it's always been about. There's a reasonable middle ground here where you can use slotting advantages to incentivize winning in the regular season even as you expand the playoff field, but it shouldn't go so far that the regular season is pointless, because then what are we even doing for six months?
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 12, 2020 10:32:24 GMT -5
If March Madness games were taking four hours and people were tuning them out and they kept making games less accessible to modern technology and the NCAA was all "let's expand to 128 teams, that'll cultivate more interest" then I'd be frustrated at them, too.
"Why aren't people watching the NCAA" "You can't watch North Carolina-Duke in the Sweet 16 Round without a cable package that includes FS1, and player changes take eight minutes. The announcers spend the last 175 or so minutes of the game bitching that it's taking too long and that the modern stats wouldn't have helped in their day." "Yes, clearly it is the number of teams that made the tournament that will drive interest.. "
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 12, 2020 10:58:10 GMT -5
Also, I just have to point out that a huge percentage of March Madness viewers don't watch a single regular season game. It's just a popular gimmick because of gambling. No one gets mad about upsets because no one really cares who wins other than the people who are alumni of one of the schools playing. Is that really the model that MLB should be following when they have a 162 game regular season? They should trade in 6 months of meaningful games for 1 month of nonsense? They can just make a 32 team bracket with 1 game eliminations and people who don't care about baseball would watch as long as their bracket might still make them some money.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 12, 2020 11:04:32 GMT -5
If I'm MLB I'd happily jump on board the train of people who don't watch any regular season games getting on the bandwagon in the playoffs. My take is that this doesn't do that. For one thing, it is SO EASY to stream the NCAA tournament. I can do it and I'm a technological moron.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Feb 12, 2020 11:12:42 GMT -5
If March Madness games were taking four hours and people were tuning them out and they kept making games less accessible to modern technology and the NCAA was all "let's expand to 128 teams, that'll cultivate more interest" then I'd be frustrated at them, too. I'm not proposing that an expanded playoff schedule is an answer to pace of play issues or their insane anti-marketing. I'm just saying I like the concept of expanding the playoffs, relative to leave them the same or contracting them. Like, fixing your toilet won't help with the leaky roof, and that crack in the foundation might make the whole thing a moot point anyway, but still, everything else being equal, you'd probably like to have a working toilet.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 12, 2020 11:24:38 GMT -5
I guess some have trouble even seeing a possible problem with making the regular season a lot less meaningful when it comes to fan interest including viewership and attendance. I mean maybe Marlins and Tigers fans show up more often in April and May, but why bother going to Red Sox and Yankees games that mean little more than pre-season games?
|
|
|