MLB 2011

[Sjofn]

Ugh, I don't feel the same at all, and not just because I got swept up in GIANTS FEVER. One of my big reasons for not liking baseball growing up is because of the no playoffs thing.

And I totally mean not even a world series. Just whoever had the best record. Good job, dudes! You won. Everyone go home. Totes exciting. WAY more fun than a playoff series where more than two teams worth of fans give a shit, with the top two from that going at it for all the marbles. You can even blab the stupid bullshit line about how the entire season is the playoffs.

[Ingmar]

I'm sort of neutral on adding 2 more teams. While I don't really like the idea of having a series as short as 3 games deciding something in the playoffs, and I don't think longer playoffs is really good, I do think that having those extra two wild card spots and the wild-card play-in series would have a couple nice benefits:

- At least two more team fanbases worth of people have a reason to pay attention to the game after August
- Winning your division has a much more tangible benefit (you don't have the chance of random fail in the short wild card series), so the race for first place will tend to matter more, which means more deadline trades etc.
- It helps with the AL East Problem.

The flip side of the good part of the long season (we really grind it out and see who is good over the long haul) is that it becomes really, really evident when you have a team that isn't going to make the playoffs, which has a bad effect on attendance for the teams that are clearly out, etc. Last year the AL had no races of interest at all, with this rule in place at least we would have had a Sox vs. Sox race for that last wild card spot to care about. I'll grant you the NL scenario last year would actually probably have become a little less exciting, but those kinds of 3 way races are pretty rare in recent history.

I don't think there's really any danger of them going to a NBA/NHL gold star for participation type playoff scenario so I'm not really buying the slippery slope argument much. Anyway, that all said I think it may actually make for worse playoff baseball to do it, since a short series is a pretty random result and the longer layoff for the other teams may screw with their momentum etc. So I'm still undecided, overall.

[Paelos]

I like a playoff in a lot of things. Hell in most sports they make a ton of sense to have a longer playoff because you can debate who was better due to schedules.

Baseball ain't that. I knew the Phillies and the Giants were the two best teams in the NL. I knew the Rays and the Rangers were the two best teams in the AL. I think we got the World Series that was acceptable, but not the best. I am totally fine with it.

It's very rare that over 7 games the best team doesn't win. What I hate is the 5 game series. If that goes to seven, I'm cool with the current format. Don't expand it.

[HaemishM]

So why have playoffs at all, at that point? Why not throw a little bag of confetti and tell the Rays good job, you were the best?

Why not ditch the regular season and just have a month-long tournament if you're going to invite a quarter of the league anyway?  

The regular season should have some meaning because it's so goddamn long. If a team that can't even win half its games is crowned World Series champ because they got hot in October, why did they play all 162 of those games?

I'd be in favor of doing another reorganization of divisions, mind you, into 4 divisions per league. Break up the AL East so that the Yankees and Red Sox aren't constantly keeping teams like Toronto and Tampa out of the playoffs. If it were up to me, I'd have:

AL East
New York
Boston
Baltimore

AL North
Toronto
Chicago
Minnesota
Detroit

AL South
Tampa Bay
Kansas City
Cleveland
Texas

AL West
LA Angels
Oakland
Seattle

NL East
New York Mets
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington

NL North
Chicago
Milwaukee
St. Louis
Cincinnati

NL South
Atlanta
Colorado
Houston
Florida

NL West
LA Dodgers
San Francisco
Arizona
San Diego

[Ingmar]

IMO you run a much, much bigger risk of a sub-.500 team making the playoffs with a model like that. Fewer divisions/more wild cards means more teams with better records, not the other way around. Small NFL style divisions is how the Seahawks got into the playoffs this year after all.

[Sjofn]

Because the season is so long, I think having a .500 team get in and then be hot at the right time is perfectly acceptable. They clearly ground it out the longest, right? ENDURANCE IS PART OF BASEBALL, I keep hearing. They play those multi-game playoff series for a reason, I keep hearing. So again: Try not to suck so hard against the .500 team, other teams!

By the way, Paelos, if you thought the Giants and the Rangers were two of the best teams in baseball last year, you definitely kept it to yourself. Before the Phillies/Giants series started, you were whining you'd have to watch a Philly/NY world series after those bastards who limped into the playoffs knocked your dudes out.  

[caladein]

The vagaries of playoff baseball, a bit like playoff hockey, makes hot streaks and the like a big issue.  In hockey a hot goalie can take a bad team really far, in baseball you're able to shorten up your rotation (sometimes dramatically with a guy like Sabathia) and use the bullpen much more aggressively because you're not saving them for anything and you've got tons of extra days off because of travel.

Those vagaries also make playoff baseball really fun to watch, but less useful at determining the "best team" with each extra team added.  At the end of the day, I think that's what any sport's playoffs should be about first, finding that year's best team.  If it were practical, I'd ditch divisions and playoffs, but it's sort of not.

If only you meanies would stop making pitchers flail at the plate...

[ghost]

I think they should lump everyone together into national league and american league, just like the old days and have a world series.  That's your post season.  That is if they want to keep the 162 game season.  Otherwise make it 82 games or some shit and have all the playoffs you want.

[Ingmar]

I think they should lump everyone together into national league and american league, just like the old days and have a world series.  That's your post season.  That is if they want to keep the 162 game season.  Otherwise make it 82 games or some shit and have all the playoffs you want.

They need to sell tickets to regular season games, though. The days when baseball just had the World Series and that was it were also the days where baseball was the only game in town. Sports fans have a TON more options these days, and outside of the core diehard segment they won't just keep buying tickets forever for a team that never has a chance at anything, which I guarantee will happen to a lot of teams if they ever went back to the 2 leagues, no divisions, no playoffs model.

[ghost]

Have you seen the stadiums lately?  They're dead.  Down in the good seats is even a ghostland.  Have fewer games, make them mean more and sell more seats to those games. 

[Paelos]

By the way, Paelos, if you thought the Giants and the Rangers were two of the best teams in baseball last year, you definitely kept it to yourself. Before the Phillies/Giants series started, you were whining you'd have to watch a Philly/NY world series after those bastards who limped into the playoffs knocked your dudes out.  

I thought the Giants drew an easy match with the Braves because we were decimated. I wasn't about to give them any credit on the front end for beating us. As for Philly, uh, division rival much? And the Yankees? I'd rather saw off my own arm than watch them in the series due to my hatred of both programs. That doesn't mean I didn't think Philly was the best team in the NL because damned if they aren't. Giants beat them fair and square with solid pitching, which is all they really had going all season long. It was very "Braves-like" in it's own way. Still, I don't think the Giants are better.

I kept expecting Texas to fall apart because I grew up in Texas and I saw it happen over and over and over and over again. Hot start, everyone gets on the bandwagon, July heat hits, and they go in the shitter. The fact they made it to October showed how strong they were.

In short, don't confuse me hating on your program for not respecting your talent.

[Sjofn]

I'm not, I just find your "I totally thought those two teams were awesome!" amusingly convenient and not at all what you were saying back when, you know, they were playing through the playoffs. My point in the "you thought it would be Phillies/Yankees" wasn't "you sure hate the Yankees" but "you sure didn't seem to think the Rangers were in the top two until apparently 15 minutes ago."

[Paelos]

I'm not, I just find your "I totally thought those two teams were awesome!" amusingly convenient and not at all what you were saying back when, you know, they were playing through the playoffs. My point in the "you thought it would be Phillies/Yankees" wasn't "you sure hate the Yankees" but "you sure didn't seem to think the Rangers were in the top two until apparently 15 minutes ago."

Again, I disagree. I thought even back then that were hard players, but that they limped in. The Giants did limp in. They were also destined to face the Phillies who I still for the life of me can't believe you beat. I'm not sure how it happened, except that you actually started hitting and outpitched them.

That has nothing to do with them being 2nd best in the NL. They were by record, but MAN was it fucking close. SD folded up shop, then the Giants took forever to close them out. This was my pregame of the series, and I was totally right.

Everyone in this town thinks Atlanta limped their way into the playoffs and is totally doomed. I'm slightly more optimistic given that San Fransisco is basically the same type of team as the Braves: all pitching and wildly inconsistent hitting. In the first game, both teams are tossing their obvious aces at each other to try and grab the all important first win. Lincecum has gotten stronger over his last 5 starts, only giving up 7 earned runs, and going 4-1. If he gives up 2 runs or more, however, the Giants usually can't figure out a way to rally and win. Lowe is 5-0 over his last five starts, giving up only 4 earned runs. If I'm looking for an edge on the game one starters, I think it goes to the Braves.

On the hitting side, the Braves are riddled with injuries. We lost our best hitter in Prado, we lost our leader in Chipper, and we lost our starting first baseman in Glaus. Due to injuries and trades, we're not playing any of the same infield we started the season with. The Braves are a patient team that coaxes a lot of walks, has struggled with timely hitting, and is a non-threat to hit the long ball. Thing is, so are the Giants. Nobody on either team is hitting well down the stretch. Nobody is clubbing the ball into the stands. Hitting is a wash.

When you look at the team defense, Atlanta has struggled mightily in the field due to the constant lineup changes, trades, and injuries. There's no consistency out there and it shows up in second half errors. San Fransisco, OTOH doesn't make mistakes. On the season, they are tied for the fewest errors and best fielding percentage in the league. Advantage goes to the Giants on this one. Braves will make at least a few errors in the series, and they have to hope they won't be hugely costly.

[Ingmar]

Fight!

[Paelos]

God, even reading that I hoped errors wouldn't be costly brings up Brooks fucking Conrad again. So many missed chances in that series because our fielding was terrible.

[Ingmar]

That's ok, it reminds me of how shitty our defense is THIS season so far. I heard Jose Reyes might be available, god I want us to trade for him so badly. Guessing it won't happen since he's making $11 million.

[Paelos]

Oh and this is what I believed about the Rangers in 2009, which is why I have/had a hard time saying anything nice about them ever (even though my secret home-town love lingers):

Texas is doing their typical winning thing before it gets supremely hot in Dallas, and they enter the epic fail months of July and August. I fully expect LA to overtake them at that point and walk away with the division yet again. The AL Central is a mess with Detroit and KC at the top, and no good explanation as to why the White Soxs are sucking so hard right now on a 4 game skid.

Texas ended up 2nd in the division, losing by 10 games to the Angels. I R SMRT.

[Sjofn]

If you go back and read all your posts, at no point do you indicate "those Giants, they are totally second best in the NL" but even more glaring to me, as you have no NL rivalry whatnot to muck you up, was your total lack of anything at all to say about the Rangers, the team you apparently knew all along was For Real, Yo, until it became abundantly clear that oh hey, they really are going to make it into the World Series. Basically, what I said, that if you did indeed think that back then, you didn't really want us to know your secret belief the Rangers were totally awesome ... that seems to be the case.

You posted a couple of wrong-in-retrospect things, it's pretty funny. This is my favorite thing you got right though:

If we split the series tonight in SF, you might not see it come back to the west coast.

EDIT: And just to be nice, to reassure Ingmar I'm not being mean FOR REAL or anything, my least favorite Paelos-was-right thing of THIS season:

Game 2, we're going to own the Giants. Lincecum has a bad outing and Hudson doesn't post two bad games in a row. He's our stopper.

[Sjofn]

Also if the Giants don't come back from their 10 game easy-peasy road trip with at least, like, 6 wins, I am going to go out on the ledge with Ingmar I think. There might be room, as he will probably just leap off it at that point.

[Ingmar]

It *is* the longest road trip of the year, and has no days off, so I'm guessing we may drop a couple just to fatigue. But yeah they better do well, because the Rockies are waiting for them at home (and still no days off before that, too.)

We're going to Giants/Rockies on Sunday the 8th, hopefully it won't be an exercise in despair! 

[Paelos]

If you go back and read all your posts, at no point do you indicate "those Giants, they are totally second best in the NL"

TBH, you're not going to hear much from me about any of the AL teams because I simply don't care. I like the Rangers from hometown bias and hate the Yankees. That's about it. They don't play real baseball in that league so it's not worth my time. I'll make sure to gush about the Rangers in the future if they make it past August.

As for SF, I'm not going to kiss their ass when they beat my boys. That being said, they were second best in total NL record. What were you looking for exactly? Me to confirm their placement in the standings?  

EDIT: If you want me to give a rundown of this year's best teams and who I think will be in the playoffs this year. I can go out on a limb for you to mock roundly later. 

[Ingmar]

Sounds like a potential rainout in Pittsburgh tonight, maybe we'll get to play our 10 games in 9 days ><

[Paelos]

The rainouts are getting ridiculous. So many with those awful storms lately.

[Sjofn]

Clearly after they add 10 wildcard teams, they should start playing in the rain like REAL ATHLETES. 

[ghost]

Clearly after they add 10 wildcard teams, they should start playing in the rain like REAL ATHLETES. 

This is the smartest fucking thing in the whole thread.   

[Paelos]

Clearly after they add 10 wildcard teams, they should start playing in the rain like REAL ATHLETES. 

This is the smartest fucking thing in the whole thread.   

[ghost]

Hey, he finished 21st in the 1983 AL MVP voting.  Who knew? 

[Ingmar]

You know I think I might have that card.

[ghost]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I do too.  Good old Fleer. 

[Paelos]

Throughout May I've decided to do some write ups on the divisions as they stand, and where I believe they will end up for the season. I've always figured that by the end of April you have a good idea who has a chance and who doesn't, so I'm going to roll with that theory to project the playoffs at the end of this year. I'm going to go West to East, starting with the NL, then moving to the AL. First up:

THE NL WEST

The NL West has provided some of the closest finishes of all the NL over the last 5 years, so this is probably the hardest division to predict going forward. At the beginning of May, Colorado has come out of the gate, guns blazing with a 17-9 record. A team known for being a late run finisher, Colorado could be extremely scary since they are starting strong as well.

As for the rest of the division, they are all under .500 and tightly packed. LA has the obvious problems with their owner and getting taken over by MLB, not to mention the emotional problems with the fan getting beaten into a coma at their stadium and the downturn in attendance. San Francisco doesn't look like the World Series Champs by their record, but there is a lot to like about their pitching staff. The Padres are pitching their asses off and can't hit the ball worth a damn. Arizona is a total greasefire.

Colorado - Colorado as a front-runner is a scary thing for other teams. They finish strong historically, so they could just put up similar numbers in May, turn on the cruise control, and run away and hide with the NL West. I'm not so sure. Colorado is 12th in batting average and 8th in slugging in the NL. How are they scoring runs then? They are a patient team who coaxes walks (2nd in the NL) and then punishes you with the long ball (6th in HRs). That won't work against teams that sport great pitching. Speaking of which, the Rockies haven't played many of those. In April, they played two series with the Pirates, two with the Cubs, and one with the D'Backs, Dodgers, Mets, Marlins, and Giants. The only team with a winning record on that list is the Marlins (shockingly). Colorado's pitching staff is pretty average. They sport a 3.70 ERA, don't really strike out many people, and give up the occasional walk. The main difference is their ability to close. They lead the NL with saves, having closed out 12 of 14 opportunities. If they are up late, forget it. Pack up the gear and head to the busses.

Dodgers - A game under .500 when you're in bankruptcy, taken over by the MLB, and attendance down 10%? That's fairly impressive. I would have expected them to go completely in the shitter at this point. However, the off-field problems mirror this team's on-field issues. They aren't patient at the plate, striking out at an alarming 217/83 K/Walk ratio. As a result, their OBP is middle of the road, saved by the fact that they can hit the ball pretty well for average. The only problem is that when they do hit the ball, it's not going for extra bases very often, and it's certainly not heading deep. The Dodgers are 11th in RBIs in the NL, and that doesn't bode well for a team who is 6th in batting average. It means they aren't getting timely hitting at all, and they are prone to striking out with runners on base. LA's Pitching isn't much better. They rely on the strikeout, which means they are also giving up a lot of big hits when they can't place the ball. They have a terrible 4.40 ERA, are tied for giving up the 3rd most HRs, and are 12th in WHIP. Simply put, this is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

San Francisco - There's a lot to like about the Giants. There's also a lot that leaves you scratching your head. They are a team that will drive their fans to drink. On the one hand you have a pitching staff with a respectable 3.60 ERA, the fewest HRs given up in the league, the most strikeouts in the league, #1 in opp team slugging, and top 4 in WHIP. Holy shit, you're thinking, we must be murdering teams! "NOTSOFAST!" says Lee Corso. You're also batting .240 as a team, are 13th in slugging, and you're 15th in RBIs in the NL. That's...not good. That's worse than not good. It's a wonder they are only a game under .500 when they are hitting like that. Is there light at the end of the tunnel? Yes, but it revolves around the fact that they sport respectable HR numbers. I'd like to see SF play a little more small-ball, cut down on the strikeouts, and up that OBP during May. That would right the ship a bit.

Arizona - What can I say about the D'Backs? At least they don't commit that many errors? That's kind of positive. Ok now to reality. They suck ass. Can they hit? Oh yes. They are second in HRs and slugging %, and 3rd in RBIs. Wait, Paelos. I thought you said they sucked? How can a team that good at the plate be bad? Oh ho ho, says I. Their pitching is wretched, and it's pitiful to the tune of a 4.82 ERA. That's 27th in the MLB, folks. This team will win 13-2, 13-8, and 10-8. Then, they will lose 5-15, 4-8, 1-6, and 4-7. They can bomb the crap out of you, but against decent pitching they fold like bad lawn chairs. The Giants took them to task by scoring 5, 5, and 5 in their series. That's that Giants team I was telling you about earlier, that CAN'T HIT THE FUCKING BALL. This team has no chance because they are too erratic. They can and will seriously ruin someone's day down the stretch by playing spoiler though. Just hope it isn't your team.

Padres - Oh Padres. You are truly the facepalm of the NL West. You have the best ERA in the NL! How can you be in last? HOW I ASK? Oh right, it's because you have the worst batting average in the Major League. That's not an exaggeration, they are dead last. Like .211 dead last. I think Mike Bumgarner is hitting better than that. Let me look it up. Yeah he's batting .222. How does that feel Padres? A pitcher on a team that can't hit is hitting better than your entire pitiful lineup. Your best starting hitter is Chris Denorfia batting .283. Obviously, you already knew that. He's a household name. When I think Padres, I think of the mighty 5 year Vet, Chris Denorfia. Truly an all-star with his .275 career average. People all throughout San Diego are naming their dogs NORF in celebration. I hate you Padres.

Overall, the NL West is a bunch of teams who are good at something, and suck at something else. That's another reason that makes it hard to predict. So how does it all shake out? While I like San Francisco's moxy. I don't think they can hit their way to the title this year unless something changes with their approach. Colorado will always be able to outbust you if it comes down to that. Add in their ability to play great down the stretch, and I think Colorado takes the division this year.

Final Standings:
1 - COL Rockies
2 - SF Giants
3 - LA Dodgers
4 - SD Padres
5 - ARI Diamondbacks

[Azuredream]

So um, how bout dem Indians? I'm enjoying the winning while it's happening but I'm waiting for the inevitable fall.

[Paelos]

So um, how bout dem Indians? I'm enjoying the winning while it's happening but I'm waiting for the inevitable fall.

Just look at it this way. You've started so hot that if you just win 73 games, you're gold.

[HaemishM]

I think you're right about the NL West except for Arizona. I think the Padres will finish last. A team that can't hit as badly as they can't hit is not going to be out a team that can hit as well as the D'Backs, and I have to think they'll find some serviceable arms before the end.

[Paelos]

I think you're right about the NL West except for Arizona. I think the Padres will finish last. A team that can't hit as badly as they can't hit is not going to be out a team that can hit as well as the D'Backs, and I have to think they'll find some serviceable arms before the end.

That's possible. The funny thing is that if you combined the Diamondbacks lineup with the Padres pitching staff, you go from two sub .500 clubs to a World Champion.

[HaemishM]

Looking at the Dbacks pitching, it seems their #1 starter is decent, and their bullpen ERA is respectable. None of their starters has more than 6 years major league experience, so it may be a matter of young arms learning how to pitch on the job. You figure by the end of the year, they'll likely be better or be gone. Those Padres' hitters though... they aren't going to suddenly starting hitting more homers in that park.