9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

[SPTO]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

But does the second wild card team have an argument about that assuming they are at least one game behind the first wild card team going into that game (I'm not sure how it works if the top two wild card teams are tied at seasons end)?

It would eliminate a team being able to ride an ace into that game to get them into the division series and require they win two high leverage games.

Yeah, logically the 2nd WC team wouldn't have that strong of an argument but I can hear the fans crying about it in that case.

It DOES eliminate riding an ace though like you said. It's a real tough nut to crack to make it equal and fair for everyone.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

*** **** I love the Red Sox.

Third game in a row Yankees needed to win to reach 10,000 and Boston wasn't having it. And we even ruined them clinching the division? I'm in heaven.

Not to mention the Sox have gone from last to 3rd in the East.

[kehlis]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

It's definitely out there like you kinda alluded to. But honestly I like the idea of the second WC team because it puts an emphasis on winning your division. Which I personally like. Also how would that 2 games series work as far where the games are played? Would it be home and home or 2 for the 1st WC team? Would it be back-to-back days? But like you I need some more to think it over, before I make a final decision on it.

The reason we can't have a best of three now is because of the amount of time it would take to split the games with travel and not give too many days off for the other teams.

It would be two back to back games at the home of the first wild card with MAYBE one day off between the end of that and the divisional series.

[kehlis]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

Yeah, logically the 2nd WC team wouldn't have that strong of an argument but I can hear the fans crying about it in that case.

Fans don't like it now after losing a one game playoff, how would it be any different?

[Majingir]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

LOL!

The Buffalo Blue Jays! lol. And that exact same lineup is being used for the game tomorrow(mostly cause the entire roster is gonna have huge hangover after the party tonight. Unfortunately for Kawasaki(who admits on live tv he's so drunk), he has to play tomorrow lol)

[Speedy]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

I've never been a fan of the second wild card team but because it's added interest I don't foresee it going anywhere.



I did hear a really interesting idea the other day though, and maybe this would be better posted in the OT forum but since the conversation is here I'll leave it here.

It's that the wild card series should be a 2 game series where the second wild card team has to win both games. If the first wild card team wins the first or second game, they move on to the division series.


Now I thought long and hard about that because it came from just a caller into a radio show which here in Pittsburgh is normally a wast to listen to.

But After I thought about it for awhile, it actually makes a lot of sense to me.

Wanted to get your guys thoughts on that though because it piqued my interest.

Very interesting idea. Would both games be played at #1? I like the do/die approach but that's a haughty mountain to climb being required to win 2 in a row just to advance. They're in the hole immediately.

Out of the box idea, though...I like it the more I think of it.

[kehlis]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

Very interesting idea. Would both games be played at #1? I like the do/die approach but that's a haughty mountain to climb being required to win 2 in a row just to advance. They're in the hole immediately.

Out of the box idea, though...I like it the more I think of it.

It would have to be played at the same location. The problem with baseball is you can't have teams taking time off like you can in football so the two games would have to play these games as quickly as possible.

They would likely have to play the first game right after 162 to be fair to the #1 seed and then move right into game one of the DS on Wednesday.

I think it's actually a fair trade off for not winning the division. You have to use your aces early in the playoffs and play with no rest versus the teams that win their divisions.

And I do think the second wild card team should have a slightly higher mountain to climb to get past the wild card round than the first wild card team. After thinking about it for awhile it makes a lot of sense to me.

[Majingir]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

Jays win AL East, the party afterwards was insane!I'll post video once it's up online if anyone does care to see it.

All these years having to see these other teams getting to celebrate, and wondering what it'd feel like to be a fan of one of those teams,been watching baseball almost 20 years,and now I finally know that feeling. Can't wait for the bigger party(world series one)! Hope it happens!

[kehlis]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

Jays win AL East, the party afterwards was insane!I'll post video once it's up online if anyone does care to see it.

Post it in the Jays thread please....

[TheMatrix31]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

Pittsburgh will more than likely finish with the 2nd best record in baseball, and just to make it to the division series, they'll have to win an elimination game against Jake Arrieta.

Tough.

It's ****ing bogus is what it is. The entire purpose of the Wild Card in a 4-team setup was to ensure that someone didn't get screwed by being in a great division and now look what's happening in the 5-team setup.

SMFH.

There's no reason whatsoever that the Pirates should finish with the second best record in baseball and have to face a team multiple games behind them in a one-game playoff just to make it to a five-game series.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

Mookie Betts has 42 doubles, 8 triples, and 18 home runs.

He's the first AL player to do that in his Age-22 season or younger since Ted Williams in 1940.

[Master Live 013]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

So a new gimmick on top of the old one? No. Might as well go back to 1 WC.

[Speedy]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

With Matrix's point, I agree that the WC winners will have a better record than a separate division winner (NYM) yet have to play a sudden-death game is wrong.

I don't think MLB can do something similar to what the NBA does in reseeding being they have 7-game series; whether it's a division winner or not, there isn't too much of a disparity. Comparatively, we'd have a NYM team that won the NL East in a WC game. At least to me, I think that's off.

Rather, I'd love to see a pre-WC era (<=1993) type of league split...two divisions of East & West. Unfortunately, nothing seems logical to me without moving a team back to the NL or AL toin order to make it an even number of teams in each league (and thus an equal number in each division for an East/West split).

Personally, I'd move MIL back to the AL (close proximity with MIN/DET) and keep HOU in the AL also. In doing so, each the NL teams would play the 7 teams in its division 13 times each and 10 against the West while the AL teams would play the 8 teams in its division 11 times each and 9 times against the West. This would be 161 games for the NL and 160 for the AL so MLB could either make add some games to get it to 162 or chop it off at 160.

From a parity sake, the best team would truly show they are the best team being they played every other team equally in the league. As a fan, I would love to see ATL-STL games more or even PIT-WAS games.

So then, I'd have two division winners (East & West) then 3 WC winners from either division.

Again though, that's my "simple" $.02...

[Master Live 013]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

With Matrix's point, I agree that the WC winners will have a better record than a separate division winner (NYM) yet have to play a sudden-death game is wrong.

I don't think MLB can do something similar to what the NBA does in reseeding being they have 7-game series; whether it's a division winner or not, there isn't too much of a disparity. Comparatively, we'd have a NYM team that won the NL East in a WC game. At least to me, I think that's off.

Rather, I'd love to see a pre-WC era (<=1993) type of league split...two divisions of East & West. Unfortunately, nothing seems logical to me without moving a team back to the NL or AL toin order to make it an even number of teams in each league (and thus an equal number in each division for an East/West split).

Personally, I'd move MIL back to the AL (close proximity with MIN/DET) and keep HOU in the AL also. In doing so, each the NL teams would play the 7 teams in its division 13 times each and 10 against the West while the AL teams would play the 8 teams in its division 11 times each and 9 times against the West. This would be 161 games for the NL and 160 for the AL so MLB could either make add some games to get it to 162 or chop it off at 160.

From a parity sake, the best team would truly show they are the best team being they played every other team equally in the league. As a fan, I would love to see ATL-STL games more or even PIT-WAS games.

So then, I'd have two division winners (East & West) then 3 WC winners from either division.

Again though, that's my "simple" $.02...

So at the end you would still have the 1 Game playoff game?

[LambertandHam]

Re: 9/14 - 10/4 Game Discussion Thread

Should be fun on Wednesday. Even with the discussion of the current Wild Card and proposed changes, I just love the fact that I'm getting nervous about Pirates' playoff baseball . Hopefully a better outcome than last years WC game.