|
|
Post by Trey - Astros GM on Sept 17, 2018 10:31:49 GMT -5
Our divisions have become quite imbalanced with NL West home to 3 of the top 6 teams overall, the top 2 overall (reg season), and the three best NL teams. The AL East has a similar thing, but slightly lesser degree. If we don't rebalance, or change the divisions somehow, the NL West has a good chance to have the top four teams in the NL side next year (with Cubbies making a push upward), and one of those four will get excluded from the playoffs because the other division's winner automatically gets in based on these arbitrary divisions.
I propose and ask for members' support to make either one AL / one NL division or have no divisions and just make it a big league.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2018 10:13:21 GMT -5
Isn't the whole point of the draft and free agency to help with keeping things balanced as well? If you don't make the playoffs try harder next season!
|
|
|
|
Post by Trey - Astros GM on Sept 24, 2018 13:50:12 GMT -5
It seems like my point didn't get communicated clearly, the point is that the divisions are arbitrary and, due to them becoming more and more lopsided, the division breakdown has a good chance of resulting in someone missing the playoffs who is deserving / a better team than someone that does make it: Point 1. Divisions are arbitrary - the divisions meant something in 2012, but now they are arbitrary and the only reason to keep it is the old "its always been like this" which isn't a solid reason. In the MLB, teams are divided based on location and AL/NL. For us, there's no such basis to fall back on as a clear reason for divisions. Point 2. Align rewards with performance - If we can improve the rules to be more fair to align winning with performance then we should. i.e. those deserving with the best teams get in the playoffs. Point 3. possible example hypothetical - To qualify for playoffs, expanding on the original hypothetical example: if 2019 NL standings are COL #1, HOU #2, LAD #3 and CHC #4 reg ssn records, ATL #5 and WAS #6, then ATL will win their division and get in the playoffs over #4 CHC.... CHC will be excluded from playoffs, despite having the better records against harder opponents on average. I don't think we want that. The divisions are meaningless and make the league less fair. Let's get rid of them. Point 4. Alternately, reseed - Along the same lines, and if there isn't enough support for changing divisions to 1 each AL/NL or 1 big 20 team division.... I think reseeding in the playoffs is most fair, objectively. The second division winner is right now being awarded the #2 seed despite a worse record than the #3 and #4 seed (NL 2018). This rule actually impacted who won the championship this year. Full disclosure, this directly impacted me this year and in year's past. Regular season I had 2nd best record in the league, so imo I deserve second seed after COL. I played my roster as if I were still in it to record results and.. if I had been the #2 seed, HOU would have won round 1 vs. LAD (as 3rd seed), week 2 vs. COL and the ship vs. NYY. In other words, if the seeding were based on record (not give priority to division winner) HOU would be champions in 2018. The point is, this rule really does have an impact on the results and again, we can make it most fair by reseeding. If this change does get made for next year, it very well could result in my losing where I would have won on the old system (50/50 either way), and that's OK because the system would be as fair as we could make it. www.fangraphs.com/tht/to-reseed-or-not-to-reseed-improving-the-mlb-playoffs/Time for offseason. See ya'll next year. |
|
|
|
Post by yankeesgm on Sept 24, 2018 20:35:57 GMT -5
I like the predictability of knowing who I would play each week. But I would like to extend the playoffs to 2 week matchups. I think that would take some of the randomness out of the matchups.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve (Padres) on Sept 25, 2018 7:52:47 GMT -5
I really like the reseeding option, and I agree with Trent on the 2 week matchups. Personally I think losing by tiebreaker in the playoffs is just the dumbest, and 2 weeks makes that much less likely to occur. The fact that we had 2 matchups decided by tiebreaker this postseason is...not great. If we do nothing else but reseed and extend the matchups we'll be okay - and it's a pretty minimal amount of effort we'll need to expend implementing those changes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2018 11:13:34 GMT -5
It seems like my point didn't get communicated clearly, the point is that the divisions are arbitrary and, due to them becoming more and more lopsided, the division breakdown has a good chance of resulting in someone missing the playoffs who is deserving / a better team than someone that does make it: Point 1. Divisions are arbitrary - the divisions meant something in 2012, but now they are arbitrary and the only reason to keep it is the old "its always been like this" which isn't a solid reason. In the MLB, teams are divided based on location and AL/NL. For us, there's no such basis to fall back on as a clear reason for divisions. Point 2. Align rewards with performance - If we can improve the rules to be more fair to align winning with performance then we should. i.e. those deserving with the best teams get in the playoffs. Point 3. possible example hypothetical - To qualify for playoffs, expanding on the original hypothetical example: if 2019 NL standings are COL #1, HOU #2, LAD #3 and CHC #4 reg ssn records, ATL #5 and WAS #6, then ATL will win their division and get in the playoffs over #4 CHC.... CHC will be excluded from playoffs, despite having the better records against harder opponents on average. I don't think we want that. The divisions are meaningless and make the league less fair. Let's get rid of them. Point 4. Alternately, reseed - Along the same lines, and if there isn't enough support for changing divisions to 1 each AL/NL or 1 big 20 team division.... I think reseeding in the playoffs is most fair, objectively. The second division winner is right now being awarded the #2 seed despite a worse record than the #3 and #4 seed (NL 2018). This rule actually impacted who won the championship this year. Full disclosure, this directly impacted me this year and in year's past. Regular season I had 2nd best record in the league, so imo I deserve second seed after COL. I played my roster as if I were still in it to record results and.. if I had been the #2 seed, HOU would have won round 1 vs. LAD (as 3rd seed), week 2 vs. COL and the ship vs. NYY. In other words, if the seeding were based on record (not give priority to division winner) HOU would be champions in 2018. The point is, this rule really does have an impact on the results and again, we can make it most fair by reseeding. If this change does get made for next year, it very well could result in my losing where I would have won on the old system (50/50 either way), and that's OK because the system would be as fair as we could make it. www.fangraphs.com/tht/to-reseed-or-not-to-reseed-improving-the-mlb-playoffs/Time for offseason. See ya'll next year. Well said Trent. Since we arent a true 30 team dynasty league, making it one big happy league would be awesome and get all the best teams in the playoffs, and in the end, isnt that what we want? Top teams playing each other in Sept to crown a champion? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2018 12:27:24 GMT -5
Leave it the same I beat Rockies and astros last year and they had better record. Sometimes someone lucky get in but I think that’s ok.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trey - Astros GM on Oct 8, 2018 11:59:29 GMT -5
Those that stand to benefit from the issue are likely saying "leave as is" and maybe some people don't care enough. Those teams that are subject to it screwing them (NL West and AL East) are the only ones that said "change it". Voting in your own interest always makes sense but take a moment to put yourself in the other's shoes and understand. NL west folks are in the worst spot - please speak up.
Mike - are you gonna be pissed and feel cheated if you come in 4th in your division but have a better record than the AL West winner?
Royals / Cubs / Dodgers - same question, what if you're 4th next year in our division but clearly better than NL East winner? If so, not only would your record be better but you'll have faced a much harder schedule.
If we change nothing, the divisions / playoff rule is not fair to all teams in the league.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2018 11:50:03 GMT -5
I think what's more unfair than that is that playoff teams get a financial edge over everyone else in terms of payroll. If anything to help with pariety the worst teams should get it!
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil - Rangers on Jan 6, 2019 15:57:40 GMT -5
Just now picking up on this interesting discussion! As a quick aside, the top 8 overall team records did make the playoffs last season (with the understanding that 4 additional division games were played by each team).
As a perceived beneficiary of the current system (i.e. in weaker division) let me say that I'm open to restructuring, reseeding, whatever. But I do not agree with extending the playoff matchups to 2 weeks. If we want the best team to always win, why hold playoffs at all? There are some very dominant teams in this league. The fact that anything could happen in a given week is exciting and gives the lesser teams hope.
Btw, I really think this is a symptom of a different issue. Why do the divisions continue to be lopsided? Not saying we should reward mediocrity but to Mike's point maybe we should be looking at ways to balance instead. We could make it effective next season so as not to screw up any 2019 plans (mine included!).
|
|
