Confession

[mth123]

Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling

The Cards would have lost to the Nationals in Game 5 if that pitch that David Freese looked at in the bottom of the 9th had been called strike 3 like PitchFx said it should have been. Just another lucky break for the Cardinals that allowed them to advance over a better team.

I agree the 2012 Cardinals are not the best example of a bad team doing well in the playoffs, but just look at the last 15 years and you can find a whole bunch of mediocre teams winning championships. Has any team ever gotten beaten so badly in their own division and gone on to win the World Series as the 2012 Cardinals?

Run differential is a very rough and crude indication of how good a team could be, not a metric of how good they really are or how well they actually played on the field during all the unique scenarios and challenges that presented themselves over a six-month season. There is a lot of strategy, skill, talent, craft and experience that goes into winning 95+ baseball games.

The ultimate measure of how good a team played is how many games they won over a meaningful sample size. 5-7 games is not a meaningful sample size in the sport of baseball. 162 games is certainly much more indicative of a team's true talent level.

And let's not pretend that this issue just arose this week. This debate over the luck-based postseason has been going on for 15 years, ever since the first 2nd-place team won a World Series. Writing it off simply as Reds fans having sour grapes this year is way off base. Heck, we had a big thread about it right here on Redszone last year when the Reds didn't even come close to making the playoffs.

I've been thinking some of the things you've written since 1969 when the team with the best record in each league didn't automatically go to the series. As a Reds fan, I remember saying almost all of the same things that you've been saying, but I was using the '73 Mets as my reason for hating expanded play-offs (all the way to 4 teams).

The Cardinals got healthy with their frontline starters Wainwright rounding into form over the season and Carpenter coming back to give strong outings at the end. All season long, the Cards had a better offense and while the Reds had a better closer, the rest of the pen isn't far off the Reds. I'd say with Wainwright back in form and Carpenter pitching, the Cards rotation is at least a push with the Reds. I just don't buy that the Reds are so clearly better. The Run Differential says otherwise and so does a look at the roster. Position for position, I'd give the Reds the edge at 1st, 2nd, 4th OF and closer. RF is probably a push, so is the middle of the pen. The Rotations are close. I'd say the Cardinals are better everywhere else. The Reds may be better at SS wth Furcal out.

I still think this thread is largely in existance because the Reds just tanked and the Cardinals are involved.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by 757690

Pythag is way overrated. A good run differential doesn't mean a team was good. A bad run differential doesn't mean a team was bad. It's a very blunt tool that kinda works in broad generalizations, but doesn't mean much in individual instances.

This year, Dave Cameron, the founder of Fangraphs, said this:



And this question and response in a chat:



I personally think the best way to judge a team's quality is to look at their won lost record. The goal of baseball is to win games, not to accumulate stats.

I think you're taking Cameron's thoughts out of context. His point was that Pythag doesn't account for personnel changes throughout the year that might not be properly contextualized through the season's overall run differential. He's not suggesting that run differential isn't important or telling; he's saying that it might not always give proper credit for teams that improve or regress through player changes.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by vic715

Thats because the Pirates played one more game than the Reds did that year due to the strike.

That's how my first favorite team won the AL East in 72, they played one more game than the Sox and they won by 1/2 a game.

Life isn't always fair

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

The difference is that in other sports like football, the WC teams are generally "in it" 'till the end of the season. If certain games go their way they can still win the division. Now that MLB has extended the playoffs you can get an also ran--a team that finished 10 games behind-- that wins the WS. Given this system the 1975 Dodgers who finished 20 games behind our Reds, could have erased the BRM in the post season. That Dodger team was literally "out of it" by the All Star break that year

Not seeing how that's any more true in baseball than it is in football. You really think the Cleveland Browns, with a couple of wins halfway through the year, was in the playoff race last season?

[vic715]

Originally Posted by westofyou

That's how my first favorite team won the AL East in 72, they played one more game than the Sox and they won by 1/2 a game.

Life isn't always fair

Tigers are still my favorite AL team.Remember what Eddie Brinkman said on live radio after the Tigers clinched the division.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by vic715

Tigers are still my favorite AL team.Remember what Eddie Brinkman said on live radio after the Tigers clinched the division.

Dave Diles Michigan Sports Hall of Fame: Eddie Brinkman Interview - YouTube

[Tony Cloninger]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Dave Diles Michigan Sports Hall of Fame: Eddie Brinkman Interview - YouTube

How they have no recordings of those games of that series and PITT/CIN series and Game 7 of that WS is amazing.

I would buy those without any problem....just like the 1975 WS DVD's

[Tony Cloninger]

Originally Posted by mth123

This won't be popular.

The Cardinals run differential of 117 was second best in the NL. It was better than the Braves (100), the Reds (81) or the Giants (69). Only the Nationals, with a Run Differential of 137, was better than the Cardinals in the 2012 NL season and the Cards did beat them head to head in a fair series.

Maybe the Wild Card and the Cards' post season run is righting an injustice that was reflected in the regular season standings. Being 36 net runs better than the Reds suggests that they were a better team by about 3 to 4 games which is a far cry from finishing 9 games back.

In general, I've been in the camp of trying to maintain the sanctity of the 162 game regular season, but this Cards' team is hardly the best example of why the wild card is such an injus,tice. I somehow think if it were any other team, and if the Reds had not just laid an egg in their post-season appearance, that this topic would be getting barely a wimper.

You know what is amazing is that the 1970 Reds with 102 wins had a +11 RD.
+11? For 102 wins? With that offense?
Looks like the pitching staff injuries caused a lot of games to get out of hand late in the year.
They also played a lot of close games....as evidenced by the 60 saves they had.

So if we knew what we know now....the collapse of 1971 was written in the Pythags.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by mth123

I've been thinking some of the things you've written since 1969 when the team with the best record in each league didn't automatically go to the series. As a Reds fan, I remember saying almost all of the same things that you've been saying, but I was using the '73 Mets as my reason for hating expanded play-offs (all the way to 4 teams).

The Cardinals got healthy with their frontline starters Wainwright rounding into form over the season and Carpenter coming back to give strong outings at the end. All season long, the Cards had a better offense and while the Reds had a better closer, the rest of the pen isn't far off the Reds. I'd say with Wainwright back in form and Carpenter pitching, the Cards rotation is at least a push with the Reds. I just don't buy that the Reds are so clearly better. The Run Differential says otherwise and so does a look at the roster. Position for position, I'd give the Reds the edge at 1st, 2nd, 4th OF and closer. RF is probably a push, so is the middle of the pen. The Rotations are close. I'd say the Cardinals are better everywhere else. The Reds may be better at SS wth Furcal out.

I still think this thread is largely in exisence because the Reds just tanked and the Cardinals are involved.

Yes, but one's subjective view of a team really is not the key point IMO. I agree that it is arguable that the Cards all around are a better team right now than the Reds. The Cards' offense is quite a bit better IMO.

But the issue for me is whether the Cards' full season performance warrants a playoff spot. Should a team, even if it is strong at the end, get a playoff spot when it is ninth or tenth in MLB in regular season record?

In a season when there are nine teams with 90 wins, should a team below 90 which did not win its division be in the playoffs?

IMO, the playoffs should reward regular season excellence. Otherwise, the 162 game season is badly diminished.

So while I agree that the Cards may be a top team at this moment, I still think that MLB should not allow such a team in the playoffs given its regular season record coupled with its failure to win a division.

Sour grapes? Maybe, but it's how I feel about this situation.

[OnBaseMachine]

When the Reds were eliminated I said I really didn't care if the Cardinals won it all again. But after reading that garbage that Mike Thierry posted, it just reminded me that the Cardinals have the worst fans in baseball and they don't deserve another lucky championship. They were barely the fifth best team in the National League and here they are one game from reaching the World Series. I used to like the Wild Card but now it wouldn't bother me if they got rid of both wild cards.

[dougdirt]

I lied. I haven't been able to watch much baseball. I watched some of the ALCS, but I haven't watched any of the NLCS. I am going to force myself to watch the World Series, but I am sure it will be painful.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine

When the Reds were eliminated I said I really didn't care if the Cardinals won it all again. But after reading that garbage that Mike Thierry posted, it just reminded me that the Cardinals have the worst fans in baseball and they don't deserve another lucky championship. They were barely the fifth best team in the National League and here they are one game from reaching the World Series. I used to like the Wild Card but now it wouldn't bother me if they got rid of both wild cards.

Yeah that was totally uncalled for. Being baited and going after one or two posters is one thing, but making those remarks about the entire board was bush league.

[George Anderson]

Originally Posted by mth123

I still think this thread is largely in exisence because the Reds just tanked and the Cardinals are involved.

Yep

[George Anderson]

Originally Posted by vic715

Tigers are still my favorite AL team.Remember what Eddie Brinkman said on live radio after the Tigers clinched the division.

I can't believe Eddie Brinkman, a HS teammate of our very own Peter Rose would be so crash.

[757690]

Originally Posted by Tony Cloninger

You know what is amazing is that the 1970 Reds with 102 wins had a +11 RD.
+11? For 102 wins? With that offense?
Looks like the pitching staff injuries caused a lot of games to get out of hand late in the year.
They also played a lot of close games....as evidenced by the 60 saves they had.

So if we knew what we know now....the collapse of 1971 was written in the Pythags.

Actually, it was written in training room, lol. Bench played hurt most of the season and dropped over 200 OPS points. It affect the whole lineup as pretty much everyone's numbers fell drastically. Carbo's off the field issues started, and Tolen was gone. Those were the biggest reasons for the steep decline that season.