PDA

View Full Version : Should Baseball have a playoffs?



valade16
10-29-2012, 05:19 PM
I constantly hear people say "the playoffs are a crap-shoot", implying there is no rhyme or reason to who wins the World Series.

Baseball is measured as performance and consistency over time. That's why the season is so long, to allow for regression to the mean.

So my question is: If you believe the playoffs are a crapshoot, or random chance, and you believe that success in baseball should be measured over time, do you think there should be a playoffs, and if so, why?

1908_Cubs
10-29-2012, 05:24 PM
Certainly. Not only do they help immensely in revenue, but they are quite fun and interesting. It forces a lot of players to preform in difficult "win or die" scenarios. Even if they are somewhat of a crap shoot and are often won by, not the best team, but the best "right now" team.

At the same time, people need to understand, the winner of the W.S., or the two teams in the W.S. are very often, not the best or the two best teams, either.

lol, please
10-29-2012, 05:27 PM
To say it's purely random is both incorrect and irresponsible. That's just something people say to justify teams winning that they cannot explain some other way, and to make themselves feel better when a supposedly inferior team eliminates their own.

Jeffy25
10-29-2012, 05:27 PM
It's the entertainment value and it keeps fans interested longer.

The trade off is weaker teams winning the World Series sometimes.


If it was like the years of old, it would have been the Yankees vs the Nationals in the WS.

It is a crapshoot, obviously. But the better team still wins about 60% of the time, so it's not that bad. But yes, there is some random variation in there, and people should at least be aware of it.


The hottest team in October that was a top 10 team the first 6 months is your World Series champion. And that's okay, we all play by the same rules...so yeah.

abe_froman
10-29-2012, 05:32 PM
of course there should be.crapshoot doesnt mean not entertaining

dtmagnet
10-29-2012, 05:44 PM
It's the entertainment value and it keeps fans interested longer.

The trade off is weaker teams winning the World Series sometimes.


If it was like the years of old, it would have been the Yankees vs the Nationals in the WS.

It is a crapshoot, obviously. But the better team still wins about 60% of the time, so it's not that bad. But yes, there is some random variation in there, and people should at least be aware of it.


The hottest team in October that was a top 10 team the first 6 months is your World Series champion. And that's okay, we all play by the same rules...so yeah.

Personally I think that is a great thing for the sport when that happens.

Nomar
10-29-2012, 05:51 PM
So underdogs winning should disappoint people? If everything happened as it was "supposed to" then life would be boring as hell.

Blink
10-29-2012, 05:53 PM
Love baseball playoffs because unlike other sports you never know who is going to win.

Honestly who thought the Giants would sweep Detroit? It sucks because I'm a Tigers fan but thats what I like about baseball.

People never wonder if the season is too long when Yankees/Red Sox win..

flea
10-29-2012, 05:59 PM
Baseball should have 2 leagues, no divisions, and no inter-league play. The top 2 records in each league compete in a 9 game series for the League Championship and then the World Series is a 9 game series. If multiple teams are tied for those top 2 spots in each league they should have a double loss elimination until your two teams remain.

giantspwn
10-29-2012, 06:03 PM
It's the entertainment value and it keeps fans interested longer.

The trade off is weaker teams winning the World Series sometimes.


If it was like the years of old, it would have been the Yankees vs the Nationals in the WS.

It is a crapshoot, obviously. But the better team still wins about 60% of the time, so it's not that bad. But yes, there is some random variation in there, and people should at least be aware of it.


The hottest team in October that was a top 10 team the first 6 months is your World Series champion. And that's okay, we all play by the same rules...so yeah.

Basically this, although as a Giants fan I know how disappointing this is can be. I really felt they had the best team in the league in 2002 and 2003 unfortunately the Angels and Marlins were both just on fire, both win WS.

conway429
10-29-2012, 06:22 PM
Because less teams make the playoffs in baseball, the teams are all usually pretty good.
Like in any sport, being the best in the regular season doesn't guarantee you win it all (and this is a good thing), but it's not like scrub sub-500 teams are getting lucky and winning.

Vintage
10-29-2012, 06:25 PM
No they should not have a playoff system in tack.

This way the Yankees could win the WS every year

cbs9889
10-29-2012, 06:35 PM
no i think they should play 162 games and whoever has the least amount of wins should get a ring

Jeffy25
10-29-2012, 06:47 PM
Personally I think that is a great thing for the sport when that happens.

Yup


If we didn't have a playoff setup, and it was just the best team in each league each year in the WS. Here would be your previous WS matchups

12 - Yankees vs Nationals
11 - Yankees vs Phillies
10 - Rays vs Phillies
09 - Yankees vs Dodgers
08 - Angels vs Cubs
07 - Red Sox/Indians vs D'Backs/Rockies
06 - Yankees vs Mets
05 - White Sox vs Cardinals
04 - Yankees vs Cardinals
03 - Yankees vs Braves
02 - Yankees/A's vs Braves
01 - M's vs Astros/Cardinals
00 - White Sox vs Giants
99 - Yankees vs Braves
98 - Yankees vs Braves
97 - Orioles vs Braves
96 - Indians vs Braves
95 - Indians vs Braves

So only two of these matchups actually happened (95 and 07).

How many rings would the Yankees and Braves have at this point?

And how many fans would have completely stopped watching baseball by mid-August? Several, you have 102 win teams not making the playoffs here lol.

That's 11 pennants for the Yankees, and 7 for the Braves lol (including 5 in a row). And they face each other 3 times in a matter of a few years.

You would have dynasties if this was still the set up

getfoul
10-29-2012, 06:52 PM
Baseball should have a postseason, but the seeding should represent what happened over 162 games, not just a distribution of teams from different parts of the country.

No divisions. Close to a balanced schedule.
Top 3 in each league make the playoffs.
4 and 5 seeds face each other to get in.

Public Enemy #1
10-29-2012, 10:32 PM
Posted in the other thread regarding my team winning this year but people are getting upset that the team with the best record not winning the World Series is ridiculous when the differential is only 4-6 games... I'm sorry that doesn't make teams better and give them the right to be called the BEST team...

whitesoxfan83
10-29-2012, 11:08 PM
They really just need to fix the first round...

bosox3431
10-29-2012, 11:25 PM
I dont think the best teams always win, but should still have a playoff. Its less of a crapshoot then the nfl.

CHRISDODGERS
10-30-2012, 12:39 AM
shorten the regular season. boom.

FortDetroit
10-30-2012, 01:32 AM
I constantly hear people say "the playoffs are a crap-shoot", implying there is no rhyme or reason to who wins the World Series.

Baseball is measured as performance and consistency over time. That's why the season is so long, to allow for regression to the mean.

So my question is: If you believe the playoffs are a crapshoot, or random chance, and you believe that success in baseball should be measured over time, do you think there should be a playoffs, and if so, why?

playoffs in every sport are like that. just the nature of the beast.

Halladay
10-30-2012, 01:46 AM
Love baseball playoffs because unlike other sports you never know who is going to win.

Honestly who thought the Giants would sweep Detroit? It sucks because I'm a Tigers fan but thats what I like about baseball.

People never wonder if the season is too long when Yankees/Red Sox win..
That's just not true at all. The NHL saw the 8th seed win the Stanley cup this year. A team who barely made the playoffs and probably shouldn't have. That's what I love about the playoffs in any sport, everyone has a shot. It's not about 162 games, it's a short series, throw the numbers out the window as far as I'm concerned. The playoffs are the best part of sport.

seikou8
10-30-2012, 02:33 AM
Yup


If we didn't have a playoff setup, and it was just the best team in each league each year in the WS. Here would be your previous WS matchups

12 - Yankees vs Nationals
11 - Yankees vs Phillies
10 - Rays vs Phillies
09 - Yankees vs Dodgers
08 - Angels vs Cubs
07 - Red Sox/Indians vs D'Backs/Rockies
06 - Yankees vs Mets
05 - White Sox vs Cardinals
04 - Yankees vs Cardinals
03 - Yankees vs Braves
02 - Yankees/A's vs Braves
01 - M's vs Astros/Cardinals
00 - White Sox vs Giants
99 - Yankees vs Braves
98 - Yankees vs Braves
97 - Orioles vs Braves
96 - Indians vs Braves
95 - Indians vs Braves

So only two of these matchups actually happened (95 and 07).

How many rings would the Yankees and Braves have at this point?

And how many fans would have completely stopped watching baseball by mid-August? Several, you have 102 win teams not making the playoffs here lol.

That's 11 pennants for the Yankees, and 7 for the Braves lol (including 5 in a row). And they face each other 3 times in a matter of a few years.

You would have dynasties if this was still the set up

boom what a great post playoffs are best thing about sports

HowFit
10-30-2012, 08:36 AM
Yup


If we didn't have a playoff setup, and it was just the best team in each league each year in the WS. Here would be your previous WS matchups

12 - Yankees vs Nationals
11 - Yankees vs Phillies
10 - Rays vs Phillies
09 - Yankees vs Dodgers
08 - Angels vs Cubs
07 - Red Sox/Indians vs D'Backs/Rockies
06 - Yankees vs Mets
05 - White Sox vs Cardinals
04 - Yankees vs Cardinals
03 - Yankees vs Braves
02 - Yankees/A's vs Braves
01 - M's vs Astros/Cardinals
00 - White Sox vs Giants
99 - Yankees vs Braves
98 - Yankees vs Braves
97 - Orioles vs Braves
96 - Indians vs Braves
95 - Indians vs Braves



Wow, only 2 happened...

mike_noodles
10-30-2012, 09:17 AM
Its a crapshoot in all sports except the NBA really.

todu82
10-30-2012, 10:38 AM
Though it's a crapshoot it helps make things interesting throughout the playoffs. So I say keep the playoffs.

RTL
10-30-2012, 11:24 AM
Of course there should be a playoff! These are the best of the best battling it out for the championship. People often complain the "best" team didn't win thinking the team with the best record is automatically the best team. Nothing could be further from the truth and furthermore, come day one of the playoffs, regular season records don't mean ****. The playoffs are filled with great baseball and greater entertainment. The people that complain about it being random and a crapshoot aren't seeing the big picture.

jlohm1
10-30-2012, 11:33 AM
the playoffs should be kept. the only thing they should change is the entire home field advantage thing. they way it's set up now is awful

valade16
10-30-2012, 11:35 AM
I dont think the best teams always win, but should still have a playoff. Its less of a crapshoot then the nfl.

I disagree completely. As Jeffy pointed out, only twice in recent memory have the top 2 teams from each league played each other for the WS.


playoffs in every sport are like that. just the nature of the beast.

I understand that, but in the NFL it's understood that you have 1 game to prove yourself. The entire idea of the game is based on the fact there aren't a lot of games so every one matters. That philosophy is amplified in the playoffs.

In baseball the theme seems to be that individual games aren't reflective overall unless they are put in context with many other games. It's why there are 162 games, so that things balance out over time. Yet the playoffs seem to be the exact opposite of that philosophy, in that suddenly every game matters and it's not about the performance average over time.

It seems like a wild philosophical shift to me.

But you're right, upsets are what the playoffs are all about.

Leandres_sf
10-30-2012, 12:54 PM
You absolutely need Playoffs.

Jeffy25
10-30-2012, 01:43 PM
Of course there should be a playoff! These are the best of the best battling it out for the championship. People often complain the "best" team didn't win thinking the team with the best record is automatically the best team. Nothing could be further from the truth and furthermore, come day one of the playoffs, regular season records don't mean ****. The playoffs are filled with great baseball and greater entertainment. The people that complain about it being random and a crapshoot aren't seeing the big picture.

A team you root for has won the last 3 World Series'.

Greedy22
10-30-2012, 03:39 PM
Yup


If we didn't have a playoff setup, and it was just the best team in each league each year in the WS. Here would be your previous WS matchups

12 - Yankees vs Nationals
11 - Yankees vs Phillies
10 - Rays vs Phillies
09 - Yankees vs Dodgers
08 - Angels vs Cubs
07 - Red Sox/Indians vs D'Backs/Rockies
06 - Yankees vs Mets
05 - White Sox vs Cardinals
04 - Yankees vs Cardinals
03 - Yankees vs Braves
02 - Yankees/A's vs Braves
01 - M's vs Astros/Cardinals
00 - White Sox vs Giants
99 - Yankees vs Braves
98 - Yankees vs Braves
97 - Orioles vs Braves
96 - Indians vs Braves
95 - Indians vs Braves

So only two of these matchups actually happened (95 and 07).

How many rings would the Yankees and Braves have at this point?

And how many fans would have completely stopped watching baseball by mid-August? Several, you have 102 win teams not making the playoffs here lol.

That's 11 pennants for the Yankees, and 7 for the Braves lol (including 5 in a row). And they face each other 3 times in a matter of a few years.

You would have dynasties if this was still the set up

This, although my homerism takes the Giants in 2003...damn rainout :p

hugepatsfan
10-30-2012, 05:12 PM
If the better team won every game wouldn't there be a 162-0 team every year? Of course not, because that's stupid.

That logic doesn't just stop when the playoffs start. Sometimes the worse team wins a short series.

Muttman73
10-30-2012, 05:19 PM
Baseball should have 2 leagues, no divisions, and no inter-league play. The top 2 records in each league compete in a 9 game series for the League Championship and then the World Series is a 9 game series. If multiple teams are tied for those top 2 spots in each league they should have a double loss elimination until your two teams remain.

Hello 1917 :facepalm:

RTL
10-30-2012, 06:27 PM
A team you root for has won the last 3 World Series'.

True but not sure I get why you pointed this out. A team I root for has been in 4 of the past 5 WS.

Rangers72
10-30-2012, 06:57 PM
is this really a serious thread OP

AsfanSince99
10-30-2012, 07:22 PM
The only way the 2 best teams will meet in the World Series is to have a playoffs where we scrap the divisions and seed all the teams according to records.

This World Series was the least watched WS EVER!

flea
10-30-2012, 09:25 PM
Hello 1917 :facepalm:

I guess it depends on what you want and what you value. If you like ratings and ticket sales you might not like my idea. If you like to see deserving teams actually win the World Series and you think the regular season is the most important regular season in professional sports, you probably side with me. I guess you fall into the "cheap thrills" camp.

Pinstripe pride
10-31-2012, 11:45 AM
if you beleive in upsets and better teams losing, playoffs are always a crapshoot

valade16
10-31-2012, 03:12 PM
is this really a serious thread OP

Yes, it is. I continually hear people refer to baseball's playoffs as a "crapshoot" or "random". Nobody really says that about the NBA or NFL playoffs.

I'm not sure if they are trying to trivialize the accomplishments of the other teams or if they genuinely believe that it is 100% random chance for who wins, as if you could substitute the playoffs for a lottery ball drawing amongst all the teams that make it into the playoffs.

Pinstripe pride
10-31-2012, 03:25 PM
Yes, it is. I continually hear people refer to baseball's playoffs as a "crapshoot" or "random". Nobody really says that about the NBA or NFL playoffs.

I'm not sure if they are trying to trivialize the accomplishments of the other teams or if they genuinely believe that it is 100% random chance for who wins, as if you could substitute the playoffs for a lottery ball drawing amongst all the teams that make it into the playoffs.

that is said about the NFL almost every year.


fact of the matter is simple, if you beleive upsets can happen, every playoff is a crapshoot

abe_froman
10-31-2012, 03:47 PM
Yes, it is. I continually hear people refer to baseball's playoffs as a "crapshoot" or "random". Nobody really says that about the NBA or NFL playoffs.


the nba is because the series are dragged out of a long period to try to insulate itself from upsets happening in a game where talent almost always wins out.and the nfl is probably the biggest crapshoot in pro sports(its something thats held up by fans in their argument of why they like it the most/why they think its a superior sport to all others/why its the most popular),anytime theres a one and done format the likelihood of upsets is extremely high

the things your not getting is that people like crapshoots.its no fun when the richest,most talented team wins everytime and no one else has a shot

justOmazing
10-31-2012, 04:19 PM
Ummmm, the best 10 teams over the season get a shot at the title. It's pretty simple. That's not a crapshoot. Like any other sport, if you make the playoffs - you actually get a chance to win a championship.

Go figure.

getfoul
10-31-2012, 04:25 PM
Ummmm, the best 10 teams over the season get a shot at the title. It's pretty simple. That's not a crapshoot. Like any other sport, if you make the playoffs - you actually get a chance to win a championship.

Go figure.

Not really. More like six teams win divisions of varying strengths, plus four other teams have a chance.

When the 7th best AL team gets a bye, while two other teams play a 1-game play-in, something is wrong with the format.

infernoscurse
10-31-2012, 04:58 PM
i find playoffs stupid and a waste of time, they need to just give the yankees the ring and call it a day

Jeffy25
10-31-2012, 05:44 PM
Not really. More like six teams win divisions of varying strengths, plus four other teams have a chance.

When the 7th best AL team gets a bye, while two other teams play a 1-game play-in, something is wrong with the format.

and two other AL teams had a better record than that team with a bye and didn't get to play in the playoffs at all (Angels and Rays)

Pinstripe pride
11-01-2012, 08:37 AM
Ummmm, the best 10 teams over the season get a shot at the title. It's pretty simple. That's not a crapshoot. Like any other sport, if you make the playoffs - you actually get a chance to win a championship.

Go figure.

hence a crap shoot. if every team can win, that exactly what the playoffs are a crap shoot.

RTL
11-01-2012, 08:59 AM
It's more about matchups in my opinion. Hate the word crapshoot being thrown around so loosely. They are all good teams with some matching up better than others. The team with the best record is not automatically the "best" team.

Jeffy25
11-01-2012, 09:41 AM
It's more about matchups in my opinion. Hate the word crapshoot being thrown around so loosely. They are all good teams with some matching up better than others.

I agree with this (not so much your last sentence). It really matters how you match up with a team.

That cliche saying of 'a game at a time' is so prevalent in the post-season. You won't lose the whole thing on any given game or night. When the Giants were down 3-1, I kept thinking. Man, if they win Game 5 with Zito against Carpenter, we are really ****ed here. Because this one game would really give the last two a Giants advantage. Even though we only have to win 1, and they have to win 3. They are matched up better than we are. Game 5 was that whole series in my mind, but the execution still had to happen.

The Giants had the favorable matchup for those last two games, and while both teams were overall very even, that favorable matchup I felt gave the Giants an advantage (not to discredit their win in any way btw, just how it happened). The Cardinals had Games 3 and 4 matchup wise pretty easily. You felt before those games started that the Cardinals were going to win them. But games 6 and 7? ****.

Pinstripe pride
11-01-2012, 11:32 AM
I agree with this (not so much your last sentence). It really matters how you match up with a team.

That cliche saying of 'a game at a time' is so prevalent in the post-season. You won't lose the whole thing on any given game or night. When the Giants were down 3-1, I kept thinking. Man, if they win Game 5 with Zito against Carpenter, we are really ****ed here. Because this one game would really give the last two a Giants advantage. Even though we only have to win 1, and they have to win 3. They are matched up better than we are. Game 5 was that whole series in my mind, but the execution still had to happen.

The Giants had the favorable matchup for those last two games, and while both teams were overall very even, that favorable matchup I felt gave the Giants an advantage (not to discredit their win in any way btw, just how it happened). The Cardinals had Games 3 and 4 matchup wise pretty easily. You felt before those games started that the Cardinals were going to win them. But games 6 and 7? ****.

unless you are a wild card team, which is what was mostly being referneced by the term crapshoot in the playoffs this year. one game in baseball is certianly a crapshoot