Blue Jays Discussion: It's the off-season. Stuff might happen. Or it might not.

[hoc123]

I get both of these points, but allowing a team like the Dodgers this year to face a .500 or worse team in a shortened series is sheer nonsense. Baseball is way way way too random of a game for a team like that to not be rewarded for being dominant for 162 games.

I had an idea earlier this season where it was 6 teams in each league, which still expands the playoffs 2 full teams, instead of 4:

1, 2, and 3 seeds are all division leaders. 4,5, and 6 can be from any division and are ranked solely by record.

1&2 get byes past the quarters.

3 v 6 (5 game series)
4 v 5 (5 game series)

1 faces lowest seed left (7 game series). 2 faces highest seed left (7 game)

Winners of the two face in the CS.

Winner goes to the WS.

Yeah this is my favorite idea for playoff expansion. It gives more opportunity for "middle class" baseball teams, while still keeping an advantage for dominant teams. At the very least there should be one bye per league.

 

[Canada4Gold]

No team would be in the top 8 with a below .500 record, this is the same format that the NHL uses in a normal season.

Umm yes they could, very easily. 8th in a 15 team league is the median which would be around .500. 8th in the NL is currently .500. The NHL uses a point system so nobody below .500 point % would make it because in the NHL average is like .570 is because of the extra point.

The Dodgers could potentially get eliminated in a 3 game series to a sub .500 team this year.

 

[The Nemesis]

I get both of these points, but allowing a team like the Dodgers this year to face a .500 or worse team in a shortened series is sheer nonsense. Baseball is way way way too random of a game for a team like that to not be rewarded for being dominant for 162 games.

I had an idea earlier this season where it was 6 teams in each league, which still expands the playoffs 2 full teams, instead of 4:

1, 2, and 3 seeds are all division leaders. 4,5, and 6 can be from any division and are ranked solely by record.

1&2 get byes past the quarters.

3 v 6 (5 game series)
4 v 5 (5 game series)

1 faces lowest seed left (7 game series). 2 faces highest seed left (7 game)

Winners of the two face in the CS.

Winner goes to the WS.

This is what I'd like to see too. 6 teams is a fair # (slightly less than 50% of each league), the byes are a fair "reward" for the best teams at the end of the regular season. Make the first round a best of 5, the LDS and LCS best of 7. No more one-off play-in randomness. Just a fuller field of complete playoffs where everyone gets a fair crack and the regular season is less of a slog because of a limited reward pool at the end.

 

[SDig14]

While they talked about making this the new normal playoff format, don't think they said round 1 would be a 3 game series did they?

I would just play 140-ish games instead and make the first round a 5 game series.

If you're the #1 seed and you lose in a 5 game series then you deserve to lose.

Not a fan of a 3 game series in a normal year though.

 

[Clark4Ever]

I know money and term played a factor but happy that he chose to sign with us especially considering our record last year.

Hopefully other FA see good things with the team.

I think prospective free agents will definitely give us a much longer look now. We are not that far off from building a sustainable contender for years to come.

 

[Morgs]

While they talked about making this the new normal playoff format, don't think they said round 1 would be a 3 game series did they?

I would just play 140-ish games instead and make the first round a 5 game series.

If you're the #1 seed and you lose in a 5 game series then you deserve to lose.

Not a fan of a 3 game series in a normal year though.

Do they though? Baseball is such a random sport that it's not out of the question that an elite team gets swept by a trash team. I'd argue it happens more in baseball than any other major sport.

It's just insane to me that a team can play around double the games of hockey/basketball and a team with ~30 more wins in the regular season has the chance to be knocked out by a team that slid into the playoffs at a .500 pace.

 

[The Nemesis]

While they talked about making this the new normal playoff format, don't think they said round 1 would be a 3 game series did they?

I would just play 140-ish games instead and make the first round a 5 game series.

If you're the #1 seed and you lose in a 5 game series then you deserve to lose.

Not a fan of a 3 game series in a normal year though.

I think in addition to Morgs' format I would also like to see the season shortened to 120-140 games. Don't compress the schedule, just give teams more days off. They could cut 30 games and that would be a month's worth of free time per team to spread out over the 4 months (april -> august) that the bulk of the season takes place in. Give teams a couple stretches where maybe they get 3-4 days off. Give them an extra day off for travel. It'd make things less hectic for the players because now they can rest up better between games sometimes and help limit pitcher wear and it would be good for the fans because it would mean that watching your baseball team wouldn't automatically monopolize 90% of your evenings during the season.

 

[The Nemesis]

According to someone on twitter the Jays hold the tiebreaker over the Yankees for standings purposes, so they don't need to sweep the O's to leap up over the Yanks for 2nd place in the division. They just need to win two more games than New York in the final series. So either a Jays sweep and NY goes no better than 1-2 or the Jays go 2-1 and the Yankees get swept.

Team Entropy 2020: Gone to Seed

 

[TheBeastCoast]

No team would be in the top 8 with a below .500 record, this is the same format that the NHL uses in a normal season.

Teams would have gotten in below .500 if it was done last season. The Rangers would have made the playoffs in the AL and the .500 Phillies would have been the 8 seed in the NL

 

[SDig14]

Do they though? Baseball is such a random sport that it's not out of the question that an elite team gets swept by a trash team. I'd argue it happens more in baseball than any other major sport.

It's just insane to me that a team can play around double the games of hockey/basketball and a team with ~30 more wins in the regular season has the chance to be knocked out by a team that slid into the playoffs at a .500 pace.

Is your issue with the new format more with an elite team losing in a 5 game series to a sub-.500 team or a team with ~30 less wins? Because those are 2 different things depending on the league.

Last year the Bolts had 15 more wins than the Blue Jackets and were swept. Extrapolate if they played as many games as MLB does and that is basically a team over 162 games with 30 less wins beating the #1 seed in the league.

It happens.

I just think if you cut the season down to 120-140 games they could even make every series 7 games and it would significantly reduce the randomness of a smaller series sample size.

 

[SDig14]

In the end, it is all about $$$ and keeping as many teams in the mix as they can.

They want more playoff games to cash in on more money and I'd be shocked if they reduced the regular season number of games by anything significant.

 

[Morgs]

Is your issue with the new format more with an elite team losing in a 5 game series to a sub-.500 team or a team with ~30 less wins? Because those are 2 different things depending on the league.

Last year the Bolts had 15 more wins than the Blue Jackets and were swept. Extrapolate if they played as many games as MLB does and that is basically a team over 162 games with 30 less wins beating the #1 seed in the league.

It happens.

I just think if you cut the season down to 120-140 games they could even make every series 7 games and it would significantly reduce the randomness of a smaller series sample size.

Hockey and Baseball are completely different sports. Baseball is far more random over a short series. Hockey there is so much parity due to the cap that even if a team is only given 35% chance to win it's not nearly as big an upset as it would be the Dodgers vs the 8th seed this year. They also plays significantly less games, so the season doesn't mean nearly as much as it does in Baseball.

To me it's ridiculous to make a team that just won 20-30 more games to even have the chance to be eliminated before the DS. It's never happened in the history of baseball, and it just means that you don't have to be elite in the season to get to that point, you just need to be passable. 8 teams is too many teams. 3 teams plus 2 wild cards (1 game playoff) is not enough.

 

[hoc123]

According to someone on twitter the Jays hold the tiebreaker over the Yankees for standings purposes, so they don't need to sweep the O's to leap up over the Yanks for 2nd place in the division. They just need to win two more games than New York in the final series. So either a Jays sweep and NY goes no better than 1-2 or the Jays go 2-1 and the Yankees get swept.

Team Entropy 2020: Gone to Seed

From what I understand the Jays do need to sweep Baltimore, otherwise they’ll finish with a worse AL East record than the Yankees and lose the tiebreaker. The Yankees can win a game, however, and the Jays will still hold the tiebreaker.

 

[Da Cool Rula]

This format is almost identical to the NHL from the early to mid 70's, I like it.

Ahhh thanks for the memories bro.

 

[kb]

I think in addition to Morgs' format I would also like to see the season shortened to 120-140 games. Don't compress the schedule, just give teams more days off. They could cut 30 games and that would be a month's worth of free time per team to spread out over the 4 months (april -> august) that the bulk of the season takes place in. Give teams a couple stretches where maybe they get 3-4 days off. Give them an extra day off for travel. It'd make things less hectic for the players because now they can rest up better between games sometimes and help limit pitcher wear and it would be good for the fans because it would mean that watching your baseball team wouldn't automatically monopolize 90% of your evenings during the season.

Back to 4 man rotations for each team. I wonder if that would have implications on existing contracts, and I could definitely see it impacting the 25 man roster....perhaps down to 24.

The players association would probably cry foul though.

 

[SDig14]

Hockey and Baseball are completely different sports. Baseball is far more random over a short series. Hockey there is so much parity due to the cap that even if a team is only given 35% chance to win it's not nearly as big an upset as it would be the Dodgers vs the 8th seed this year. They also plays significantly less games, so the season doesn't mean nearly as much as it does in Baseball.

To me it's ridiculous to make a team that just won 20-30 more games to even have the chance to be eliminated before the DS. It's never happened in the history of baseball, and it just means that you don't have to be elite in the season to get to that point, you just need to be passable. 8 teams is too many teams. 3 teams plus 2 wild cards (1 game playoff) is not enough.

I guess the way I see it is more than likely the Dodgers team in this example is going to lose to someone worse than them anyways. Not talking specifically about the Dodgers, since they seem to choke a lot in the postseason, but teams like them that are the clear #1 seed in the league.

I think since 1995 with the format change there has only been 3 or 4 teams with the best record win the world series.

So like 85% of the time they aren't going to win anyways. So of the remaining 15% where they do win, how often will those years be ruined by playing a team so much worse than them similar to Dodgers vs. Marlins?

I would argue it won't have a significant impact on the winner of the world series but it definitely could screw a team or 2 if they play poorly out of the gate.

For the record, I prefer your format better than the proposed, LOL. Just feel like playing devil's advocate apparently today.

 

[Clark4Ever]

In the end, it is all about $$$ and keeping as many teams in the mix as they can.

They want more playoff games to cash in on more money and I'd be shocked if they reduced the regular season number of games by anything significant.

Yes, but by extension, it's also a hell of a lot more fun for the fans of those additional teams in the playoff mix.

I was even more engaged than usual throughout the season because of the expanded playoff format. Despite not having a home field and all the injuries, I knew that we still had a legitimate shot at sneaking into one of the last playoff spots.

 

[hoglund]

While they talked about making this the new normal playoff format, don't think they said round 1 would be a 3 game series did they?

I would just play 140-ish games instead and make the first round a 5 game series.

If you're the #1 seed and you lose in a 5 game series then you deserve to lose.

Not a fan of a 3 game series in a normal year though.

Remember in 1985 the Blue Jays vs. Royals was the 1st year that they changed it from a best of five to best of seven. The Blue Jays were huge underdogs and took a 3-1 lead in the series and would've won, but it was a best of seven and the Jays blew it, mind you there was a lot of controversy and it appeared that the umpires wanted the Royals to win, which proved true when they went on to play the Cardinals who were also screwed by the umpires. Personally I like this year's format.

 

[Canada4Gold]

According to someone on twitter the Jays hold the tiebreaker over the Yankees for standings purposes, so they don't need to sweep the O's to leap up over the Yanks for 2nd place in the division. They just need to win two more games than New York in the final series. So either a Jays sweep and NY goes no better than 1-2 or the Jays go 2-1 and the Yankees get swept.

Team Entropy 2020: Gone to Seed

As mentioned by someone else they need to sweep and have the Yankees lose at least 2 games. They obvious would need to win 2 more games than the Yankees to tie them. The first tiebreaker is h2h which is tied at 5, the 2nd tiebreaker is division record. The Jays are 3 behind in that so would have to win 3 to catch up, thus 2-1 and the Yankees going 0-3 would see the Jays losing that tiebreaker. Yankees are playing an NL team so no change. 3rd tiebreaker is is division record in final 20 games, the Jays would win that by 1 game if they win all 3 games to tie the 2nd tiebreaker

So sweep, and have the Yankees lose at least twice.

 

[hoglund]

Umm yes they could, very easily. 8th in a 15 team league is the median which would be around .500. 8th in the NL is currently .500. The NHL uses a point system so nobody below .500 point % would make it because in the NHL average is like .570 is because of the extra point.

The Dodgers could potentially get eliminated in a 3 game series to a sub .500 team this year.

The Blue Jays are the 8th seed worst to qualify in the American league and they're. 526, which is better than. 500, mind you there are 3 more games, but that % won't change much in 3 games.

 

[Canada4Gold]

The Blue Jays are the 8th seed worst to qualify in the American league and they're. 526, which is better than. 500, mind you there are 3 more games, but that % won't change much in 3 games.

If 1 example is all it takes to prove a point then take a look at last years AL standings. The 8th best record was the Rangers at 78-84.

The 8th team is literally the middle team of 15. Which on average would put them at .500. Which with variation would put them below .500 almost half of the time. They'd be above .500 almost half the time, with the extra being when they finished exactly .500.

The AL 8th best team has been below .500 each of the last 3 seasons before this one.

 

[hoglund]

If 1 example is all it takes to prove a point then take a look at last years AL standings. The 8th best record was the Rangers at 78-84.

The 8th team is literally the middle team of 15. Which on average would put them at .500. Which with variation would put them below .500 almost half of the time. They'd be above .500 almost half the time, with the extra being when they finished exactly .500.

The AL 8th best team has been below .500 each of the last 3 seasons before this one.

I agree that 8th is average, but more times than not would be a .500 team. I don't remember what the poster said maybe it was you, but it sounded like they'd be upset having a losing team making the playoffs, my point was very few 8th seeded teams would have losing records, not impossible, but certainly not probable.

 

[Canada4Gold]

I agree that 8th is average, but more times than not would be a .500 team. I don't remember what the poster said maybe it was you, but it sounded like they'd be upset having a losing team making the playoffs, my point was very few 8th seeded teams would have losing records, not impossible, but certainly not probable.

Over the last 7 years it's happened 8 times. Slightly more than half(with 2 leagues 7 years gives 14 oppurtunities so 6 times it hasn't happened in a league). I'd put that in the probable range. Math says with the 8th team being the median the 8th team would be above .500 about half the time, and below .500 about half the time. IDK if you consider half probable but that's where it should be logically, and that's where it has been in the last 7 years.

If you agree that 8th will be average why don't you think it would be .500? League average record has to be .500 because every game someone gets a win and someone gets a loss. Again this is not like the NHL using a point % where league average will be much higher than .500 point % because there's a ton of games where 3 points get handed out.

 

[Eyedea]

Just to comment on the talk of byes in a proposed playoff format. I feel like top seeded teams already get a bad rap in the play-in era (9-7 record vs wildcard winner). I can't imagine them wanting more time off while their competition is coming off a best of 5 series and riding high on momentum.

 

[tmlfan98]

As mentioned by someone else they need to sweep and have the Yankees lose at least 2 games. They obvious would need to win 2 more games than the Yankees to tie them. The first tiebreaker is h2h which is tied at 5, the 2nd tiebreaker is division record. The Jays are 3 behind in that so would have to win 3 to catch up, thus 2-1 and the Yankees going 0-3 would see the Jays losing that tiebreaker. Yankees are playing an NL team so no change. 3rd tiebreaker is is division record in final 20 games, the Jays would win that by 1 game if they win all 3 games to tie the 2nd tiebreaker

So sweep, and have the Yankees lose at least twice.

Would the Jays pass Cleveland if the Jays sweep and Cleveland gets swept? Both teams would end with 33 wins, and I haven't seen anyone clear up who that potential tiebreaker would favour.