GMs: favor the extra wild card

[Brutus]

Reports coming out of the GM meetings today are that the general managers are in support of adding one extra wild card from each league, creating a wild card round.

The question, then, is whether the wild card round would be a 1-game, do-or-die with the top seed awaiting the winner or whether it would be a brief 3-game series.

Either way, I am totally on board with this. I think it re-emphasizes the regular season and creates a much stronger reward for winning your division. Especially if it winds up being a 1-game series.

[RedsManRick]

Of course they favor it. More wild card means more teams in the playoff hunt and more teams in the playoffs which means more revenues. The people responsible for minding the purse will almost always favor something which pads it.

[Sea Ray]

I would want it to be a three game series. One is just too quick for a sport like baseball that is so dependent on one player, the pitcher

[macro]

I understand the sentiment behind rewarding the division winners, but this could potentially create an equally unfair situation. What if a team wins 100 games but doesn't win the division, while another team wins it's division with 84 wins. The 84-win team from the weak division gets to relax while the 100-win team is sweating it out in a wildcard round. The proposed extra round is far from perfect, and certainly not worth it's disadvantages.

Is this a reaction to the Yankees-Rays situation this year? It seems that it is. How often has that situation existed? Is the reaction knee-jerk?

[Slyder]

Originally Posted by macro

I understand the sentiment behind rewarding the division winners, but this could potentially create an equally unfair situation. What if a team wins 100 games but doesn't win the division, while another team wins it's division with 84 wins. The 84-win team from the weak division gets to relax while the 100-win team is sweating it out in a wildcard round. The proposed extra round is far from perfect, and certainly not worth it's disadvantages.

Is this a reaction to the Yankees-Rays situation this year? It seems that it is. How often has that situation existed? Is the reaction knee-jerk?

You risk that scenario of a weak division getting in regardless. I mean look at the Cards the year they won it. They won 82 games. Anything that adds additional intrigue to the august games is a good move. You don't water it down to the point like NBA or NHL but you give more emphasis to not let up just because youve already clinched a playoff spot (Phi/Atl a couple years ago I think, Yanks/Rays this year). I think playoffs would be better if you can condense it. None of this where one series is in Game 3 and the other is leading into Game 5 crap either.

[blumj]

Originally Posted by macro

I understand the sentiment behind rewarding the division winners, but this could potentially create an equally unfair situation. What if a team wins 100 games but doesn't win the division, while another team wins it's division with 84 wins. The 84-win team from the weak division gets to relax while the 100-win team is sweating it out in a wildcard round. The proposed extra round is far from perfect, and certainly not worth it's disadvantages.

Is this a reaction to the Yankees-Rays situation this year? It seems that it is. How often has that situation existed? Is the reaction knee-jerk?

I think it is. If you look at what happened with the Yankees and Rays, you can see the flaw with a 1 game WC playoff right away. The last few games of the season, with the Yankees and Rays still fighting it out for the division and using their best pitchers in the process, the Red Sox would have already clinched WC #2 with no chance at either the division or WC #1(assuming there's even any advantage to being WC #1 vs. WC #2), doing nothing but preparing for that 1 game with their best starting pitcher all lined up. That's awfully nice reward for finishing in 3rd place.

[The Operator]

Originally Posted by blumj

That's awfully nice reward for finishing in 3rd place.

Would this new system allow a 3rd place team to be in the WC round?

I had it in my head that it would be the two best 2nd place teams, not the two best non-1st place teams record-wise. But I could be wrong about that.

[Roy Tucker]

I kinda like the do-or-die 1 game playoff.

With jury-rigged first round playoff matching, there is very little penalty for the wild card. Teams coast into the finish because there is little stigma for being the WC team.

A one-game playoff sure makes it a lot more of a nail-biter and teams will want to avoid it like the plague.

[fearofpopvol1]

I hate this idea. Baseball has (in my opinion) the best current playoff system of any sport. The best tea in each division and then the one team that plays the best of all 3 divisions who didn't win their division. This new idea cheapens the playoffs in my opinion.

But hey, we all know it's about the almighty dollar anymore. Screw anything else!!

[redsfan30]

One more chance for our Reds to make the playoffs sure sounds like a great idea to me.

[Yachtzee]

Great. Just what MLB needs. More playoffs.

If they aren't going to cut down the number of games in the season, I see this as being a terrible idea. Stretch the playoffs further into November. Yeah, great. One of the great things about baseball is that it's playoffs are relatively compact. The whole thing is over in a month. Compare that to other sports where just about everyone but the worst teams are let in and you get playoffs that seem to be a season unto themselves.

Personally, I'd like to see them drop down to two divisions in each league and give the first and second place teams in each division a playoff spot. Move to a balanced schedule so that each team is playing every other team in the league a fare amount of times. Drop interleague play. Right now the problem with weaker teams making the playoffs arises because of the inequities of the unbalanced schedule and smaller divisions in which the quality of teams may be lacking in one compared to another. Add to that an interleague schedule where nobody plays the same teams and you get a system where weaker division winners are bound to go to the playoffs in favor of stronger teams in stronger divisions.

[bucksfan2]

I like the way the playoffs are right now. Adding another wild card and another round would only push back the playoffs and make them more irrelevant to the overall sports world.

[redsfandan]

Originally Posted by Yachtzee

Personally, I'd like to see them drop down to two divisions in each league and give the first and second place teams in each division a playoff spot.

+1

Doubt it will happen but it would make it alot less likely that a 90 win team misses the playoffs while an 85 win team makes it.

[TRF]

Originally Posted by redsfandan

+1

Doubt it will happen but it would make it alot less likely that a 90 win team misses the playoffs while an 85 win team makes it.

no it wouldn't. This year 5 teams in the NL won 90+ games, with 4 making the playoffs. Split the NL Central in half and three of those 5 are in the NL East. The West would be significantly weaker as the NL East teams will have the higher average payroll. You'd be more likely to see a 90+ win team watching an 85 win team in the playoffs. A new AL east would be even worse with NY, Boston and TB. plus CHI and DET added.

No thanks from me on this scenario.

[dfs]

The orioles and the blue jays would suggest that bundling more teams into the AL East might not be a good move in the name of competitive balancing.

Once they put the wild card in place, you saw this coming. Why not just do the NBA thing and put everybody in the playoffs? If the goal is to maximize fan interest in marginal clubs.....Sure it cost you pennant races, but they've already gone. Put 8 teams per league in the playoffs and have rounds of 8/4/2 and then the world series.