MLB Off-Topic

[slickdtc]

MLB Off-Topic

There's way too many things involved to say the home team winning the world series is really relevant. A few of those series since it was decided were sweeps, so was home field advantage important there? Maybe but because the home team wins doesn't NECESSARILY mean that there's a large home field advantage.

Having said that, the ASG determining home field is stupid. It doesn't bother me, but it's dumb. The team with the best record should have home field advantage. Why do we play 162 games to give home field in the most important games of the year to a team that had 3 players participate in an exhibition game? Just doesn't make any sense.

I would be interested to know the home/away splits in the WS. As in, when HFA team won those 9 times, how many wins were on the road and how many were home. Would give much better context.

Totally agree on the second point btw. I think most people do. There is absolutely a better way to keep the game interesting and avoid a tie other then tying HFA to the outcome of an exhibition match. Even with HFA having some influence in the WS, I don't think even those stakes are enough to make a player focus or try any more then he would anyway. The nature of a baseball game demands that you have to, or at least appear to, play the game to the fullest. There is some leeway, but a whole component of the game isn't taken out like in the NHL and NFL (they try to keep it as non-contact as possible). The NBA is just a glorified skills contest.

Adding additional incentives was a stupid panicked decision after the tie game debacle.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Off the top of my head, the Twins (in 87 and again in 91) are the main one I think of who rode home-field in the WS.

I'd be OK with best record, but that's not a perfect way to determine home-field either.

Well you could argue the D'Backs over the Yankees in 2001 also, but again, would they have not won w/o HFA? There's just no way to know that. And to top that off, none of those games were played in the ASG-determines-HFA era.

I'd prefer best record to ASG winner, but I'm more of the opinion that it doesn't matter all that much who has it. At least best record puts the so-called destiny in the hands of the teams themselves.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

They had to replace Carpenter with another Cardinals' player due to Carpenter being the lone representative for the ASG.

Thanks. That dawned on me after I made the post as a potential reason why it was Diaz, but now I know for sure. As a Cubs fan, it certainly does feel strange when the Cards have a lone ASG representative.

[countryboy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Thanks. That dawned on me after I made the post as a potential reason why it was Diaz, but now I know for sure. As a Cubs fan, it certainly does feel strange when the Cards have a lone ASG representative.

It hasn't been the best of years for the Cardinals. Very streaky.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Just to complete the triple post here because, hey, I'm just waiting for the Euros to start (unless someone beats this post), what you're also implying by the "one snub could decide the World Series" argument is that the 2,3,4 innings or whatever played by Player A instead of Player B will totally influence the outcome from win to loss or vice versa.

It seems more likely to me that, unless we're snubbing ASG god Mike Trout, the ramifications are very, very unlikely to swing the outcome of the game.

So, in other words, 3 innings of Addison Russell over whoever you like better will not only cause the NL to lose the ASG when they would've won, but then the eventual NL WS representative will go on to lose for that reason and no other reason. That's the argument as I see it and I just can't get on board with that.

From a statistical standpoint, it's just noise.

[countryboy]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

For me, it has nothing to do with the outcome of the game nor the outcome of the World Series. For me, its all about who is deserving. And imo, Addison Russell isn't deserving over the 3 guys that I've mentioned before.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

There's way too many things involved to say the home team winning the world series is really relevant. A few of those series since it was decided were sweeps, so was home field advantage important there? Maybe but because the home team wins doesn't NECESSARILY mean that there's a large home field advantage.

Oh, there are far too many lurking variables. I would much rather be the home team than the road team in any game I play, though. Not only that, I would much rather open a WS with a 2-0 lead regardless of where I play the next three games. I haven't checked the amount of teams that have come back from a 2-0 deficit to win the World Series, but I can bet that it beats the probability of winning four out of five games because of the pressure it puts on the other team.

Having said that, the ASG determining home field is stupid. It doesn't bother me, but it's dumb. The team with the best record should have home field advantage. Why do we play 162 games to give home field in the most important games of the year to a team that had 3 players participate in an exhibition game? Just doesn't make any sense.

Well, this leads down a different hole entirely. Why do we have playoffs then? Why not just the team with the best record? Let's balance the schedule, play every team across both divisions evenly, and determine it by that. Sarcasm aside, best record also couldn't come into play here for the same reason of the unbalanced schedule. There are certainly other ways to configure how to do this though, of course.

I don't mind it determining it, but I think more people are upset for the reason it took place to begin with. The Milwaukee ASG ended in a tie, and Selig probably said, "It's time to institute a change!" This was the change. They could have done dozens of other things, and they landed on World Series home field advantage.

I will say though, going off a previous topic, that fan voting is actually sort of "better" now that the home field advantage matters, because the fans have to realize that the players who are out there could impact this. I know that it's worse when it turns out the undeserving player is out there, but at least the thought matters.

I see the data here. And it certainly is data. But we have to be careful that we're not attributing the outcome to the wrong reason. Most teams that win HFA pre-Selig era anyway won HFA because they had the better record because they were the better team. I'd be hesitant to chalk these wins up to being because of having HFA or even that HFA played a significant role. It would be an interesting analysis if there were some methodology that could be derived to put odds on how much effect HFA had (where is Nate Silver for something like this?).

I'd love to know as well. Yep, I can't just use this argument for the sake of it. The majority of players swear by how their home fan base helps them in those times of need, though. Forget the whole "traveling/hotels/unfamiliar territory in the field of play" stuff... those fans just bring things to a whole new level for some teams. Just something to cheer behind.

To put it bluntly, outside of the DH rule, playing the games at a neutral site would mean nothing more than the regular home field advantage that is being able to bat in the bottom half of each inning.

[Sportsforever]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

This discussion, however, does validate a point I've made several times before on other baseball boards and that is that using ASG selections as criteria when discussing a player's HOF credentials is worthless.

[redsox4evur]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

This discussion, however, does validate a point I've made several times before on other baseball boards and that is that using ASG selections as criteria when discussing a player's HOF credentials is worthless.

I agree with this completely the ASG is a popularity contest, essentially.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Jr.]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Yes I do.

Since 2003, the home team is 9-4 in the World Series.

But only 2 of those have come down to a game 7, and those were split 1-1.

I think that means that the team that won was just better and didn't get much of a boost from playing games 1 and 2 at home.

It's all conjecture though

[TripleCrown9]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I agree with this completely the ASG is a popularity contest, essentially.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Exactly, which is why I don't have a problem with the process. The All-Star game is more for the fans.

Besides, 2014 proved the All-Star Game wasn't important when Wainwright decided to toss meatballs at Jeter.

[Cubfan]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

It would be "just an All-Star game" if it didn't have such major ramifications in October.

The winner of the allstar game shouldn't get home field advantage in the World Series. It's a dumb way to decide that.

[franch1se]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Preller continues to sign International kids with Adrian Morejon today for 11mm. Favorites to sign Jorge Ona when cleared by MLB

[TheMatrix31]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Just because "home field advantage doesn't mean much in baseball" doesn't mean that having the All-Star Game winner decide which team gets it isn't ****ing stupid as ****.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Just because "home field advantage doesn't mean much in baseball" doesn't mean that having the All-Star Game winner decide which team gets it isn't ****ing stupid as ****.

Does anyone actually like the rule that the ASG determines home-field? I can't remember anybody saying they actually liked that or supported that. Does anybody?