Huge start from Nova.

If Pettitte looks good Tues, the Yanks may hang on to this thing.

I was a lukewarm fan of the second Wild Card. But I like it a lot more; not because of the zany races for the spot itself, but for the way it rewards winning the division. I know as a Yankee fan that I don't want any part of the one-game play-in.

Oh, and Tampa needs to win tomorrow if they're going to win the AL East.

Agree TVE

Whether accidental genius or not its put more value on winning division, making regular season more relevant while at the same time bumping revenue for those also rans that would normally be outof it by now.

My guess is fans are going to love the drama of the extra elimination games too. Sudden death is always fun.

EDIT: By the way.....is Miguel Cabrera already a Hall of Famer under the "if he got hit by bus tomorrow" scenario ?

Kiner is my benchmark for those guys and I think Cabrera matches up pretty well with Kiner. They are similar in WAR (46-44 RK), OPS+ (151-149 MC) and are similar in their slash lines with Cabrera having a batting average edge that Kiner makes up for with walks. I think the fact that Cabrera has played a few years at third is a plus for him even if he is not especially good at it.

That's my "should he go" answer. My answer to the "would he go" question is absolutely yes. I think the voters would definitely elect him.

The problem is that someone wins the elimination game, and is then as much in the playoffs as the division winners. And that someone will probably, about half the time, have done worse in the regular season than the team it eliminates.

It isn't perfect, Vaux. I don't think any system could be. I like the old divisional system with no Wild Card at all, but that isn't coming back. And, to some extent, I think we all like the playoff system from our childhood best of all.

Also, and unrelated, while the Yankees were getting their bullpen ready, I saw Francisco Cervelli warming up a pitcher. Is he active?

So I guess you guys just haven't noticed that under the old system, Oakland would currently lead the WC race by two games with a better record than the division leaders in either the east or central divisions. Please tell me which team in either of those divisions would be in a position to relax because they could just fall back on the wild card route to the post-season. Even Texas wouldn't exactly be in coasting mode just yet.

IOW, we have good races because we have good races, not because they added the second wild card. And of course, there is an excellent chance that we will be rewarding a team for winning a division even though they finish with a worse record than either wild card team.

It potentially puts more value on winning one of the divisions compared to the old set-up. At the same time, it potentially puts less value on winning the other one.

If Texas and Oakland pull away, for instance, then this year's AL West race will be strengthened by the dual wild card system. OTOH, the AL East race will be a lesser affair. What would have been a win-or-go-home division race is now a win or settle for this more than acceptable consolation prize.

Edit: And what cerc said.

I saw Francisco Cervelli warming up a pitcher. Is he active?

Yes he is.

EDIT: in fact, he got into a game (9/4).

We got a look at this system last season, it was pretty exciting. Except that the one game playoff was in Game 162 and the team's didn't play each other. The Cards used their best pitcher to advance out of the final game, they still won the World Series. In a few years we will have a fifth place World Champion.

What would have been a win-or-go-home division race is now a win or settle for this more than acceptable consolation prize

Ehh. The "more than acceptable consolation prize" is probably going to be having to fly to Oakland to play a game that BAL/NYY will have about a 52% or so chance of losing and will probably have to use any available pitcher in to try to win, and then, if they win that, they will have to play Texas without HCA. The winner will play Detroit or Chicago while having HCA and a gets a little time to set up their pitching.

Ehh. The "more than acceptable consolation prize" is probably going to be having to fly to Oakland to play a game that BAL/NYY will have about a 52% or so chance of losing and will probably have to use any available pitcher in to try to win, and then, if they win that, they will have to play Texas without HCA. The winner will play Detroit or Chicago while having HCA and a gets a little time to set up their pitching.

And when the alternative is going fishing, as the loser of that race would have done under last year's format, then yes, the win one more game to be back on near equal terms with the rest of the field is more than an acceptable consolation prize. As Robert alludes to, I don't think the new format, in practice, is going to become some insurmountable maze for teams to navigate. Two teams will play, one will win, and that winner will be in close to the same boat as the old WC was.

And of course, there is an excellent chance that we will be rewarding a team for winning a division even though they finish with a worse record than either wild card team.

Also, there's a chance that an under-.500 third-place team makes the playoffs and then gets hot and wins the World Series. There's no perfect system, trying to balance a "reward" for winning lots of games but not winning the division and a "reward" for finishing first in a weak division.

I don't think the current system is the best in the galaxy, but it's probably among the least bad.

it's probably among the least bad

Big whoop. The previous system was "probably among the least bad." So were the two before that.

I've had many of these discussions over the years, but I always come back to the same point. If you want to play in October, WIN YOUR DIVISION!!! You have 162 games, about 17 against each divisional foe. You know who the other teams are, and in general terms you know their rosters and the approximate number that you'll need to win to play forward. No amount of whining and excuse-making has been persuasive for me. Part of what makes the playoffs wonderful is that it's such an exclusive club that genuinely good teams sometimes don't make it.

And when the alternative is going fishing, as the loser of that race would have done under last year's format, then yes

That's this year, but there are other years, like 2005 for example, when it would have forced the Yankees and the Red Sox to take the end of the season more seriously. And, while it will not be an "insurmountable maze" I think if you asked Girardi, Showalter, players and fans of these teams which path they prefer, you would get a pretty definite answer, and I think we will see that in the way Girardi and Showalter manage the rest of the year.

That said, there is no compelling logic or powerful reasoning that makes it clear that two WCs or one is inherently "better"; this is in many respects an aesthetic argument, as I have said many times. But I like the fact that if you want to avoid the play-in game, you have to win more games than the other guys in your division, whom you play 18-19 times apiece. And, aesthetically, I think play-in day will be fun.

is = in

I like the fact that if you want to avoid the play-in game, you have to win more games than the other guys in your division, whom you play 18-19 times apiece.

This aspect will actually be even a little bit better next season, with every team playing each of its divisional rivals 19 times. Unfortunately, it seems there will still be substantial differences among divisional foes in the rest of the schedule. I would like any system that involves divisions a lot better if every team in a division played the same schedule.

Miguel Cabrera already a Hall of Famer under the "if he got hit by bus tomorrow" scenario ?

Judging from Miguel's driving record, it's much more likely he would cause the accident, no?

is Miguel Cabrera already a Hall of Famer under the "if he got hit by bus tomorrow" scenario ?

The problem with the Kiner comparison is that Kiner got in (after many years) because he absolutely crushed in black ink. He led the league in HR 7 straight years. He had 52 points of black ink compared to the average HoFer's 27. He's the ulitmate peak candidate.

Cabrera is doing pretty well by modern standards on black ink (18) but it's just not nearly as impressive. He's never led the league in anything two times in a row; heck he's never led the league in the same category twice. Kiner never won an MVP but I think Cabrera needs to if he wants to move into clear "hit by a bus" territory.

Then there's the problem of shifting standards. The voters have never been particularly kind to slow-footed, peak sluggers. And era has to hurt him (in the bus-hit category again):

Cabrera: 6394 PA, 318/395/559, 313 HR, 43.5 WAR
Giambi 26-35: 6100 PA, 293/421/553, 324 HR, 43.5 WAR
Delgado 25-34: 6429 PA, 287/397/571, 370 HR, 39 WAR

Just looking at "careers" from 1990 on, there are 20 players who amassed 40+ WAR through their age 30 seasons (Cabrera smack dab in the middle), many of them in substantially fewer PA than Cabrera. Vlad had 43.5 WAR in 5500 PA, Beltran in 5800, Jeter in 6200. Nomar (in 4500 PA), Beltre and the great Chuck Knoblauch are not far behind. Nomar might be a particularly good comp for "hit by a bus." 41 WAR in 4500 PA and that includes missing almost all of his age 27 season, his 24 game cup of coffee at 22 and his half-season at 30. Essentially 7 years at 6 WAR a year -- an incredible peak. I don't think he has a chance at the HoF.

If Cabrera has anything resembling a standard decline from where he is now (he's still only 29!) he will cruise in (barring a roid controversy). But I don't think he's there yet unless maybe he litereally is hit by a bus or has some other dramatic end to his career.

That's this year, but there are other years, like 2005 for example, when it would have forced the Yankees and the Red Sox to take the end of the season more seriously.

And there will undoubtedly be years where the second wild card will make races worse, not better (2011 in the AL would have undeniably been weaker under this system than the one it was played out under). So ultimately, what we're left with is the fact that we've strengthened one race, weakened another, but let one more less accomplished team into the mix annually.

And there will undoubtedly be years where the second wild card will make races worse, not better (2011 in the AL would have undeniably been weaker under this system than the one it was played out under). So ultimately, what we're left with is the fact that we've strengthened one race, weakened another, but let one more less accomplished team into the mix annually.

No matter what spin you put on it, teams still have to win the division to stay out of a one-and-done. You apparently don't care about that; I do, and I think a lot of other fans do as well.

Unfortunately, it seems there will still be substantial differences among divisional foes in the rest of the schedule. I would like any system that involves divisions a lot better if every team in a division played the same schedule.

Well, that is an interleague thing, and I am not a huge fan of interleague.

I'm not a huge fan of interleague either, but my point here is that there is no reason for it to prevent teams in a division from playing the same schedules. With six five-team divisions, it would actually be quite easy.

KC with a walk-off inside-the-park homer!

i just clicked on my yahoo sports page and loved the royals game.

what happened on that homer? was it legit or fielder diving / missing the ball? not in a room with MLB network right now...

what happened on that homer? was it legit or fielder diving / missing the ball? not in a room with MLB network right now...

I saw the video now, it bounced off the foul pole.

Tonight may have ended things for the Angels.

When your manager is actively costing your team games, as Scioscia has done so many times this season, it's time to cut him loose. Boston can have him.

thanks 27. bork bork bork!

My heart. It is broken.

No matter what spin you put on it, teams still have to win the division to stay out of a one-and-done. You apparently don't care about that; I do, and I think a lot of other fans do as well.

I'm not the one spinning this robin. I recognize the second wild card makes winning one division per league more valuable than existed previously. It's the sole redeeming feature of this move (and, in those years where the Yanks/Sox/Rays dicked around at season's end, indifferent to the division title, I can understand its appeal).

What irks me is that supporters of the 2 WC system ignore the flip side to that - one division race per league is now weaker now than it would have been.* If things play out as they stand now, this year's AL East division title will not be as valuable as it would be if the Yankees and Orioles (or Rays) were playing for a single playoff berth, rather than a division title and a backdoor playoff entry. I could say you obviously don't care about that, etc. But it's more than that. Dual WC supporters don't seem to acknowledge its existence.


* Not always, it should be noted. In a year like last year, the presence of a second wild card would not have weakened any other division race in the AL, since both WC 1 and WC2 came from the AL East. Of course, years like last year demonstrate that simply adding an extra playoff team doesn't mean the pennant chase will be made better. It obviously would have been much less riveting if the Sox/Rays/Braves/Cards were merely playing out the last two weeks, setting up their rotations for the only game that mattered.

This A's team is feeling it tonight--they just have so much energy. So far the defense deserves the win.

There's not a single redeeming factor to watching the Os play in Oakland.

The As have completely owned the Orioles lately. That ballpark is a complete joke. The games start in the middle of the night, even on a Saturday. The entire As team seems to take pride in looking like they have never groomed themselves. And those yellow uniforms are the most hideous things I've ever seen.

And those yellow uniforms are the most hideous things I've ever seen.

Auf wiedersehen?

Do the A's have some sort of secret starting pitcher mill hidden away in the mountains somewhere?

The ever popular wild pitch during an IBB.

I believe the A's/O's started at 7pm.

I believe the A's/O's started at 7pm.

6pm local time was the start.

We're about an hour away from the Rangers' divisional lead being down to two games.

Rangers lose. A's have a chance to pull 2 games back now.

If the A's go all the way this year, Shooty, what's your third team? :-)

If the A's go all the way this year, Shooty, what's your third team? :-)

Not the Mets.

I am rooting for B'more here. Think of Bunk! Also, the lure of sad Yankee fans is too much to let slip away.

Tying run at the plate.

Balfour isn't going to make this easy. Hold onto your butts.

Ballgame.

Except for the Yankees winning, a fine, fine night of baseball. Drive home safely.

*Re-enters Orioles Pessimism Mode*

Dual WC supporters don't seem to acknowledge its existence.

I think it's more that, as you say, we don't really care. All of these various permutations have plusses and minuses, and trade-offs which will manifest in different ways depending on the ecology of the league in a given year. As said many times, the only "fair" system was pre-1969: everybody plays everybody the same number of times, and the two teams that finish first go to the WS. And even then, of course, you might have had two great teams in one league.

Think about the NL instead of the AL (yes, this is the AL thread).

Looking at it from the "excitement" standpoint, the only race going in the NL is the one for the second WC. That might not be to your taste, (and it really isn't to mine, either--I don't like the Wild Card)since it involves a bunch of teams at or a little over .500, but it does bring in fans of several teams who would otherwise be out of it.

Looking at it from the "rewarding performance" standpoint, it means that there is a real cost to the Braves for not being as good as the Nationals, even though the Braves are having a very nice year. They will be playing a one/done against (probably) St. Louis or Los Angeles. So, I think you are placing less value on avoiding the play-in game than there actually is, and therefore overstating how much the races are "weakened", (and perhaps you don't like the yearly play-in games, which is certainly your call).

People around here often say the postseason is a "crapshoot" and perhaps it is. But ONE game is probably more of a crapshoot than five or seven is. That is one of the reasons, incidentally, that I am opposed to the Strasburg shutdown.