MLB expands the postseason to 16 teams with three game playoffs

[nicksaviking]

 

For the record, I’d be more okay with this idea if the opening series was five games.

The more games, the more likely the better team wins out.

 

I don't know, the Twins have gotten embarrassed in each of their past one game, five game and seven game playoff series. Maybe a three game series is their ticket to success.

 

If not, I say we go back to a nine game series.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I don't know, the Twins have gotten embarrassed in each of their past one game, five game and seven game playoff series. Maybe a three game series is their ticket to success.

 

If not, I say we go nine.

One upside to all of this is that it’s highly unlikely the Twins and Yankees face off in the first round. If they do, that means something went pretty wrong for one of them.

[#1ShaneMackFan]

 

It’s not about overlooking anyone, the problem is the randomness of baseball.

The best teams in baseball should not be forced to roll the dice on three games in a sport where those best teams win only 65% of their games.

Then why have playoffs at all? Crown the team with the best record. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

The 87 Twins should have their WS trophy taken from them, amiright?

On the bright side, the 88 Twins would have advanced to the ALCS

[#1ShaneMackFan]

 

If there were randomness then the Twins would have won one series against the Yankees.

Or even a game or two...

[Brock Beauchamp]

If there were randomness then the Twins would have won one series against the Yankees.

That’s not how randomness works. One can flip a coin 20 times and get heads every time, it’s just very unlikely to happen.

[Shaitan]

 

Gee, I can't wait to see the 27-33 New York Mets get walloped by a far superior team in the playoffs.

While I also don't like the format, this is almost verbatim the argument I heard from the Coasts about the Twins last year in reference to playing the Central (i.e. implying they were really a 27-33 team). I guess this makes it fair to those people?

[Danchat]

 

While I also don't like the format, this is almost verbatim the argument I heard from the Coasts about the Twins last year in reference to playing the Central (i.e. implying they were really a 27-33 team). I guess this makes it fair to those people?

The Twins still played the AL East, West, and NL East... we were 40 games above .500! It's not like we barely crawled in 10 games above .500 or anything.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Or even a game or two...

Actually, an indication of randomness is that the Twins *haven't* won a postseason game against the Yankees in a time period spanning three managers and dozens of different players.

 

The odds of that happening are very low, which is why the Twins currently hold an MLB record for postseason ineptitude against a single team.

[jorgenswest]

I like watching meaningful baseball games. I will be watching.

[DocBauer]

I also suspect that money has a ton to do with this--it often does, but in what way do you see a bias to the coasts?

Perhaps knee jerk reaction on my part, but for the most part, the wealthiest teams in the largest cities with the most $, and the larger viewing audiences are generally coastal cities/teams. With more teams added to the playoffs, I think it's a safe bet most of the extra WC teams will come from the East and the West.

[DocBauer]

In case you hadn't realized, the sole purpose of professional sports is to make as much money as possible.  If you want money out of the sports you consume, you'll probably need to drop down to high school, if not further.

Agree 100%. And really, it's hard to begrudge MLB trying to recoup as much $ as they can considering this crazy and abbreviated season. But I still enjoy the basic structure of the game as is and feel this messes with the integrity of not only the game, but sort of cheapens the 60 game season by letting in additional teams that normally wouldn't qualify for the post season.

 

And then, have we opened Pandora's box? As previously stated, I dislike the one and done WC play in game and would prefer a 2 out of 3 format. Does the change this year get carried over to 2021 and beyond? I'm in favor changes for the good and health of the game, but I don't want to see an NBA format where half the teams make it to the post season.

[Nine of twelve]

 

 They have taken a season that already has questions, but had a postseason that would at least give it some merit of legitimacy, and blown it all into a complete bastardization of what baseball is supposed to be.

No. This season was already a complete bastardization of what baseball is supposed be.

[Shaitan]

Pretty soon I'll get more realistic baseball playing The Show than watching Manfred's product.

[Twodogs]

This thing is definitely about money. MLB should make more which is good for baseball. But it will have some other effects. I believe that the trade deadline could become almost a moot point as on a normal year you'll have at least 20 teams in the thick of it and probably a few more that have a shot. That doesn't leave many teams left to dump their players.

[Jimv]

 

Perhaps knee jerk reaction on my part, but for the most part, the wealthiest teams in the largest cities with the most $, and the larger viewing audiences are generally coastal cities/teams. With more teams added to the playoffs, I think it's a safe bet most of the extra WC teams will come from the East and the West.

Given that you said "for the most part" and "generally", I agree with the first sentence, although I suspect Baltimore, Tampa, and Oakland and Miami don't like to be reminded of it. But w/r/t your second sentence, and speaking only of the AL (since I'm not up enough on the NL to have that informed an opinion), I don't think that's a safe bet.  My best guess is that the two extra WC teams will be either Cleveland or White Sox--whichever isn't in the top two, and one of Oakland or Anaheim or maybe even Texas.  Given that 2/3 of the teams are on the coast, I don't think that looks very biased.  And if I was forced to guess about the NL, I'd guess one will come from the East and one will come from the Central.

[Nine of twelve]

 

A team in the playoffs should beat the less seeded team.

That's true in theory but that's not true in baseball. All it takes for a bad team to win two games against a good team is for one mediocre pitcher to have a good day and one good pitcher to make a mistake.

[Nine of twelve]

 

A team in the playoffs should beat the less seeded team.

If that's the argument then don't even play the games. Just advance the higher-seeded team. And again in the next round. And so on. Just award the championship to the team with the best record.

[Nine of twelve]

 

If you believe the regular season is an accurate barometer of relative team quality, then there's no need for any postseason.  At all.

I'm starting to think that that's what I believe.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The Yankees lost a series against both the Tigers and Orioles last season. The baseball postseason is worse if an elite team is knocked out because they lost two games.

While I agree generally that any team would have a slim chance in any series, I think extrapolating those odds from regular-season records isn't quite right. The Yankees weren't playing a 3-game series facing elimination when they lost series to the Tigers and Orioles -- they were playing a random 3 games in a 162 game long marathon. They approached it differently, and most certainly made choices in roster and playing time that they wouldn't have made in a postseason series.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I don't like 16 teams making the playoffs.  I think it's too high.  But I love the best of three game series for the wild card teams instead of the one-game wild card playoff we've had over the last few years.  With the one-game system a lousy team with an ace pitcher could knock off a better overall team without an ace.  It wasn't fair.  And by playing all three potential playoff games in the ballpark of the team with the better record, it awards the better team.  I hope they keep this rule in post-corona baseball.

Has the scenario you described ("a lousy team with an ace pitcher could knock off a better overall team without an ace") actually happened in the one-game wild card matchups? I think that is an exaggerating that ignores the fact that the structure of MLB and the wild-card setup generally produces a fairly even matchup.

 

And the point of the wild card is that it shouldn't be "fair" relative to the division winners. If a team wanted to avoid that fate, they could have won their division instead.

 

I don't know if 3 home games vs 1 home games is fundamentally more "fair" for the wild card contestants, but it takes longer and usually involves lesser players. The playoffs should be more sprint than marathon anyway. I think I'd rather stick with the one-game wild card.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think a lot of teams will be bunched together if there were only 5 spots in each league.   I will be real happy they expanded the playoffs if we finish 6th in the league.    I don't want to see the playoffs expand once we go back to the full regular season schedule.   

This is an excellent point that has been overlooked.

 

Mathematically, the shorter the sample, the less separation between team records. Heck, there may even be a number of ties among the top 5 spots. Makes sense they'd want to reduce the importance of a 60-game season (heavily division weighted) in determining the playoffs, as compared to a 162 game season (with a slightly more balance schedule).

 

Hopefully it's just a one-year thing, though!

[Winston Smith]

Manfred has to go!

[Brock Beauchamp]

While I agree generally that any team would have a slim chance in any series, I think extrapolating those odds from regular-season records isn't quite right. The Yankees weren't playing a 3-game series facing elimination when they lost series to the Tigers and Orioles -- they were playing a random 3 games in a 162 game long marathon. They approached it differently, and most certainly made choices in roster and playing time that they wouldn't have made in a postseason series.

Oh, for sure, but no team as bad as the Orioles or Tigers will make the postseason.

[Trov]

I wrote on a comment in regards to this in another article.  I find that this will make the regular season almost pointless because teams already had such a large gap between the best teams and worst.  The whole point is to one keep interest late into season for most teams because very few teams will be out of it until the last week.  It will also decrease the likelihood that the "best" team will win the WC, but that does not happen all that often anyways.  

 

That being said, it is about entertainment, not about legitimacy.  I will watch all season, and the playoffs that are almost a slam dunk for Twins now.  I am interested to see if the rumor that they will do a selection for the first round on who opponent will be.  Read rumor from Buster Onley.  That is real power of having best record.  If you see a team that is injury riddled and you match up well against but would not be normal match up you can pick them, provided it falls within the rules.  

[DocBauer]

My reflections and opinions.

 

I never liked the old format I grew up with only 4 divisions and 2 leagues. There were countless good teams with good records, including the Twins here and there, who were shut out after the marathon season that is baseball.

 

On of the smartest things MLB has ever done...could be argued the only smart thing they have done...was the re-alignment of 3 divisions in each league and adding the WC. [i still don't like the Brewers in the NL and Astros in the AL, but I digress].

 

I am also OK with 2 WC teams, but hate the 1 game play in as it too "gimmicky" for me. It should have always been a 2 or of 3 format.

 

We sometimes make jokes about the "integrity" of the game, and deservedly so for many reasons. But the marathon that is a baseball season is special and unique on so many levels. And to sudddnly adopt an NBA "half the teams make it anyway" approach demeans the game, IMO. We have seen NBA teams at .500 and even below make the playoffs previously. And there has been a call to re-seed the playoffs as a result. I'm not current on the most recent decisions/agreements made, but thought I heard they may re-seed for the conclusion of 2020.

 

I'd have to research to be fully accurate, but I believe the NFL has had at least a few .500 teams make the playoffs with their current format. Speaking of WC and not division winners who may have been the same. I believe 4 NFL teams have made the playoffs with losing regular seasons. And now the NFL is talking about expanding their playoff structure?

 

In this weird, short season, while I don't like it, I can see MLB opening the gates for ONE YEAR. Since everyone is on board with it, and it could bring in $ to help offset financial losses.

 

But if this continues in 2021 and beyond, I think baseball loses something. It diminishes everything from the extended season to the trade deadline to the Hot Stove League. Baseball, IMO, becomes less interesting when an 83 win team enters the playoff picture after a marathon season, with all the intrigue involved.

[Nine of twelve]

 

In this weird, short season, while I don't like it, I can see MLB opening the gates for ONE YEAR. Since everyone is on board with it, and it could bring in $ to help offset financial losses.

This season is a giant asterisk anyway so from that standpoint I have come to the realization that I don't care that the postseason is a sham. I guess I'm in favor of having a few more Twins games to watch so whatever.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Why this postseason format is trash:

 

Both the Orioles and Tigers, possibly the worst two teams in baseball, are 2-1 after defeating fringe contenders in the Red Sox and Reds and they both did it on the road.

[carewser]

As others have said, mere home field advantage in a best of three series is insufficient reward for division winners. Maybe division winners should only be subjected to a best of 3 series in the first round if they lose Game #1.

 

In other words, in the opening round’s best of 3 series, maybe all division winners should be given the opportunity to knock out their opponent in one game. So in order for the lower seed to eliminate the division winner, one of the lower seed’s two wins would have to be Game #1. If the lower seed lost Game #1, then the “series” would end, and the division winner would advance.

[yarnivek1972]

IMO it’s going to be moot. The Marlins are having a major outbreak.

 

I think there is no way the season finishes. They’llbe lucky to make it past July.