The Merits of the Wild Card: A Scientific Treatise
by Grant Brisbee on Oct 6, 2008 12:59 PM PDT
Email
PrintYesterday, there was 1,532 hours of baseball on television. It was glorious. Playoff games, all. The Brewers struggled to stay alive, knowing their first playoff appearance in two decades was in jeopardy, but the Phillies’ pitching was too effective. The White Sox struggled to stay alive against the Rays – the Vinny Castilla-signin’, Matt White-stealin’, Wade Boggs’s number-retirin’, sad-sack Rays, for god’s sake. An Angels win last night was going to make Angels fans happy. A Red Sox win last night was going to make Red Sox fans happy. No one really wins in a situation like that, but at least it was a good game.
So through the 1,532 hours of exciting baseball, I’m thinking one thing: Hooray for the wild-card. Sure, I would have loved to see a Rays/Red Sox end-of-season showdown for the AL East. It would have come down to the wire, and it would have been legendary. But here’s my math:
That’s, like, scientific and junk. I get to watch more teams contend throughout the regular season, and more playoff games when the regular season is settled.
The grumblers are grumbling. I can hear them. "Well then, smart guy. If more playoff games is your goal, then why not expand the playoffs to eight playoff teams like basketball or hockey?" Hey, I can drop some mathemagics on that, too:
If watching an under-90-win-team make the playoffs = -10 fun units
Then four playoff teams for each league in 2008 = 30 fun units (AL), and 20 (NL)
Six playoff teams for each league= 0 fun units (AL), and 0 fun units (NL)
Eight playoff teams for each league = -20 fun units (AL), and -20 fun units (NL)
Remember, fun units are tangible and tradable commodities. If you expand the playoffs to eight teams, suddenly you’re giving out more fun units than you’re taking in. Then you’re getting daily calls from fun-unit collection agencies, you’re paying outrageous fun interest…it’s a nightmare. And the equations don’t have to run on fun units to work, either. You can flip the equations around and use lameness points if you prefer. For example, under-90-win-teams that make the playoffs are worth 100 lameness points, and under-.500 teams are worth 1,000.
I see that I’ve blown you away with my non-arbitrary proof that the wild card is good. I do not anticipate any dissent in the comments section of this post, though I promise not to delete any stray anti-wild-card comments that may arise. I’ll leave them up as intellectual curiosities to study, even if they have been scientifically pillaged.
Open Wild Card Approval Thread.
34 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The only complaint I have is that I wish the Division Series would be expanded to 7 games. Everything else is fine by me.
Neglectful father of David Quinowski
I understand the sentiment (especially since we’re now looking at the two top teams being eliminated off the bat),but I don’t know that a longer series is the answer. I mean, apparently the 2009 WS is already scheduled for November next year (I expect that the WBC is the culprit here). Do we really want to extend the postseason even longer?
Of course, I don’t have a better solution. Giving first-round byes to two top teams in each league (and adding two teams to the mix in each league) might work, but it isn’t clear that a week off would help, and adding teams starts a slippery slope to nhl-style playoffs. What about having 7 games for the first two rounds, and making the series just 5. Nah, you just can’t eliminate the possibility of a 7th game of the WS.
Get rid of non-travel off-days
That would squeeze one day each out of the DS and LCS schedule, leaving room for two more games. It would also make it much easier to follow the playoff schedule. If the Sox and Angels played game one on Wednesday, they should be playing game two on Thursday. That’s not me talking, that’s science.
Scott McClain: Great story, no place on the 2009 Giants.
But they do it anyway.
Look at the LCS schedule: 2 games scheduled on Friday the 10th, Monday the 13th, Saturday the 18th. Yet for some reason the other Saturday in the schedule (the 11th) they only have one game.
In the DS schedule they had 3 games on Wed, 3 on Thurs, then only 2 each on Friday and Saturday. I know there’s college football and all, but even so you’ve gotta get better ratings for a Saturday game than a game that’s outside of prime time on a weekday…
Scott McClain: Great story, no place on the 2009 Giants.
Ugh. I already quit paying attention because the playoffs go on too long. I’d cut both the first and second rounds to best-two-of-three and get to the World Series as quickly as possible.
Thank god my 401k is sitting in a check on my desk as I have been in the process of rolling it over for the past couple weeks.
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.
by WilliamVanLandingham on Oct 6, 2008 2:59 PM PDT up reply actions
That appears
To have been an unintentionally brilliant move on your part.
I suggest buying back in around ~ 9000.
Eugeniooooooo!!!!
by FairweatherFan on Oct 6, 2008 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah until then, I am thinking of cashing it out and burying it in my back yard
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.
by WilliamVanLandingham on Oct 7, 2008 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Any Giants fan who votes Nay was obviously not alive in 1993.
"He called the sh** POOP!" -- Adam Sandler
+75
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Oct 6, 2008 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions
These poll results make baby Bob Costas cry.
Anagram of "Giants pitcher Matt Cain" = TRAGIC MAN, ISN'T PATHETIC
by Stuttering John Tamargo on Oct 6, 2008 1:47 PM PDT reply actions
When the Wild Card was first used...
my response was: Will it really take 162 games to decide
who the best four teams are in each division?
Every year the answer is an emphatic yes! I do find that I enjoy
it (though I agree 7 game Division Series would be better).
They say some players get out of bed hitting; Pablo Sandoval doesn't wait that long
division = league
They say some players get out of bed hitting; Pablo Sandoval doesn't wait that long
How about
returning the Division Series to a 2-3 format instead of the current 2-2-1, where the team with the better record gets the last three games.
This would shorten the number of days each series takes; reduce travel time; and, in my opinion, return some semblance of advantage to the better regular season team. Seems like the last few years the Cubs/Angels/D-Backs and others have coasted to the end of the regular season and then it’s taken them a game or two to shake off the rust (or in the case of the Cubs, they never did.) They lose one of both of their home games (Games 1 & 2) then need to win on the road with their season at stake. In 2-3, even if they’re down 2 games to 0, they know they’ve got the home crowd behind them three nights in a row, and only the Game 1 starters can possibly pitch twice in a series. I really think this would make for more competitive series.
The one major downside is that the team with the better record could potentially sweep and get only one home playoff game instead of two. Which is probably why it’ll never happen.
No, my Crazy Crab bobblehead is not for sale.
The one major downside is that the team with the better record could potentially sweep and get only one home playoff game instead of two.
Or get swept.
/is still angry at 1997
/is aware that the Marlins had a better record, but they were still the wild card team
Trent Kline: Decentish. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com. It's not being updated right now. Hope for more at your own risk.
I like the wild card...
ideally in fact, if I ran baseball, I’d contract two teams (Florida and Toronto, perhaps? Or Florida and Minnesota?), even out the leagues to 14 teams apiece with two 7 team divisions in each. Then the two division winners and two wild card teams from each league get into the postseason. I like it because expanding division size makes it less likely that a team from a comically weak division gets in because of the strength of its competition (read: Angels, Dodgers) and because it’s just a whole lot more symmetrical to me. so i guess you could say i’d actually expand the wild card, but still let just eight teams, total, into the playoffs.
Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...
by Smoke on the Water on Oct 6, 2008 2:01 PM PDT reply actions
Yes on the wild card
You can be the best team in baseball, but finish 2nd in your division because of bad luck, injuries, etc. The wild card gives those good and great teams a chance. As a baseball fan I want to see the best teams playing in the playoffs. The only other thing that makes sense would be expansion to 32 teams with 4 divisions in each league. But expansion is viewed so negatively these days that I doubt that will happen anytime soon.
Greetings, Marklar! I am Marklar! This is Marklar.
This is why I love the NFL
Say what you want about it, but the division system they have is awesome.
Fixing the Wild Card
I am in favor of the Wild Card, but would make one fundamental change to the seeding process. Whichever team finishes with the best record in the league should get to choose their first round opponent from the remaining three teams. They can choose the Wild Card, another division winner, it doesn’t matter … and they can also choose a team from their own division if they want.
Think about this year … the Cubs would have certainly avoided the Dodgers (picking the Brewers, I imagine — despite being a division foe). In the AL, the Angels would want nothing to do with the Red Sox, probably choosing the White Sox instead.
With this approach, finishing with the best record actually means something — the chance to avoid the hot Wild Card team that comes into the playoffs with momentum.
If they won’t do the right thing and make the first round 7 games ( and this is Selig’s MLB so they won’t) this is at least a workable alternative. I like it. At least it rewards the team with the best record in the regular season with an edge.
Ivan Ochoa - Heir to the legacy of Rob Andrews & Rikkert Faneyte!
They already get to choose the schedule
I wouldn’t give them that much more of an edge. All they really need to do is remove the rule about 2 teams in the same division not playing in the first round. The team with the best record should play the team with the worst record no matter what.
Greetings, Marklar! I am Marklar! This is Marklar.
I'm a math major..
and you’re proof was flawless. Good work.
proud father of the newly acquired Brandon Crawford..
I'm a realist
more playoff spots = more chances the Giants get it. I guess if I was a Boston or Yankee fan I might disgree, but also, I would have to kill myself.
If Giants aren’t in, I just don’t watch so who cares if there are 4000 playoff games or 4.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN
Let's just go all Premiership!
Division 1 of the best 15 teams, Division 2 of everybody else. Each division gets their own playoffs, and they play each other at the end. There’s relegation and promotion, and if you finish last in Division 2 three straight years, you get contracted. Besides all the flaws, why not?
And yes, I love the Wild Card, don’t change anything except maybe 7 game NLDS yadda yadda yadda…
I support Roger Kieschnick in his quest to becoming the best Kieschnick ever to play professional baseball.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
