Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

Go Cubs!!! Two of Three Best Teams in MLB Play Wild Card Tonight


Note: This thread is 3856 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

I can see both sides.  I like the current system because it rewards those that win their division which is where the majority of their games are played.   The Mets team the Cubs played against and beat during the regular season does not even closely resemble the Mets team in the playoffs.

I wouldn't be against a re-seeding in terms of home field advantage but I believe division winners should be provided priority over wild card teams.  I also wouldn't be against a 3 game wild card series versus a one game playoff.

IMO If you want to minimize the weight of division winners you have to;

  1. Reduce the number of inter-divisional games
  2. Eliminate inter-league play

You mean to reduce the number if inTRA-divisional games, right?  Otherwise I pretty much agree with all of what you said. :)

On this topic, I found an example of the problem that would arise if they reseeded without evening up the schedules.  In 2013, the Pirates finished the regular season 2 games better than the Dodgers, so if reseeding occurred, they'd have hosted the winner of the Dodgers-Reds "wild card" game/series in the divisional playoffs.  However, when you look at the season splits, you see that the Pirates won a large portion of their games within their division (45-31) and struggled against the west (14-18).  The Dodgers, OTOH, dominated the east and central (22-11 and 21-12, respectively) and finished 37-39 in a more evenly matched division.  (Not that its relevant, but FYI, the Dodgers were 4-2 against the Pirates head-to-head)

So the argument that the Pirates played in a stronger division doesn't really hold water in this case (like it can be used this season) ... and I would find this scenario to be drastically more unfair than what we currently have, so again, I say that I don't think it's at all plausible to talk about reseeding unless you're also going to do a significant rebuild of the scheduling system.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

This happens more in football where they play a LOT fewer games. And sometimes it matters, too.

I think re-seeding should happen in the NFL, too. One year (they lost) the 12-4 Steelers had to travel to play the 8-8 Tebow-led Broncos… who played in a shitty division. But because "any given Sunday" and whatnot…

Unlike in the NFL, in MLB, there are over 10x as many games so the season records pretty well shake themselves out to fairly accurately represent the ability of the team(s).

I agree it's a bigger problem in football due to the limited number of games, but if baseball did go to a single division playoff system I'd like to see the schedules normalized to make it fair for all teams. 

Joe Paradiso

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3856 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Haiduk - Archdevil        
    • Probably since the golfer has to swing the club back and up. The hands have to move back and up. You can feel them go back and up just by turning the shoulders and bending the right arm, because it brings your hands towards your right shoulder.  The difference is if you maintain width or not. Less width means a shorter feeling swing path so the more you need to lift the arms. Being as someone who gets the right arm bend at 110+ degrees, it's 100% a timing issue. I am use to like a 1.5+ second backswing. It probably should be like 1 second at most. Half a second or more will feel like an eternity. I have had swings where I keep my right arm straighter and I am still trying to time the downswing based on the old tempo.  Ideally, for me, it is probably going to be a much quicker and shorter (in duration) backswing, while keeping the right elbow straighter. Which also means more hinging to get swing length without over swinging. 
    • Wordle 1,789 5/6 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨⬜⬜ ⬜🟩⬜🟩🟩 ⬜🟩🟨🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • I'm currently recuperating from surgery, so no golf, but have been thinking about this quite a bit. This and the don't overbend the right arm thing. It's hard for me to even pose the position, so I'm not 100% sure, but I feel like it's impossible to have the right humerus along the shirt seam and not overbend your right arm, unless your hands are down near your hips. If the left arm is up at or above the shoulder plane and your right arm is bent less than 90 degrees, then your right humerus has to raise or your hands will get pulled apart. Your left hand can't reach your right hand unless either the right upper arm is up or the right arm is overbent. Is that right? If it is, then focusing on not overbending the right arm would force you to raise the humerus. And actually thinking further on it, if you do overbend your right arm, then you're basically forcing your upper arm down or forcing your left arm to bend. Since (for me at least) bending the left arm too much is not something I think I need to worry about, it means that the bend in the trail arm is really the driving force behind what happens to the right humerus. 
    • I managed to knock off a 3, a 13, and a 15 a couple of weeks ago. The 3 was a 185 yard par 3 with a 6 iron to 12 feet. 13 was a 350 yard par 4, which was a 2 iron and a 9 iron to about a foot. 15 was a 560 yard par 5 with a driver in a bunker, 4 iron into the semi, gap wedge to 8 feet and a putt.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.