User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.3138 seconds
55 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 19, 2008 at 06:56 PM (#3012439)Just be sure to bring it up with a ring of garlic around your neck, that keeps Bud at bay.
Naw, Game 1's the A's can handle. It's the Game 5's that trip 'em up.
Get to games 6 and 7? I have no idea what the A's mojo is there.
And the coin is tossed by a naked cheerleader.
That's the ticket!
Joey, you're all right, but you are the least funny A's basher in the history of BBTF. Can't you do better than Jack Crust? That should be your floor. If you don't have snark better than Jack Crust, just don't bother.
If you shorten the first round, the post-season is now just 4 + 14 + 7 = 25 games long.
If you shorten the last round, the post-season is 20 + 14 + 1 = 35 games long.
And any team that makes it past two rounds of playoffs is likely pretty deserving anyways.
If anything it should be the opposite. The MLB playoffs is the most important part of the year and should be expanded (again). The first round should be 7 games. The leagues should also consider going to 2 wild card teams and force them to play a 5 game series first to decide which one gets to play against division winners, or 3 wild cards and force the worst division winner to play an early 5 game series against a wild card while the two best division teams get a week off.
What is so difficult to understand that having more games with the best teams playing each other with a championship on the line is better?
To do this the regular season should either go back to 154 games, or Saturdays should become mandatory double headers. The playoffs should start September 7th to put the World Series in the first week of October. Get the playoffs finished before the worst of the cold weather.
And the coin is tossed by a naked cheerleader.
That's the ticket!
With the losing team literally put to death. WE WANT BLOOD!
So you're saying that I should put a tarp over my comedic stylings?
Beheaded, one by one. By naked cheerleaders using samurai swords. And lots of flashing lights and loud music over the PA and stuff.
There ya go. That's much better. I am completely in favor of you taking over BL's schtick since he seems to have disappeared on us.
Better!
As a rule, juvenile puns on a person's name are the worst, most self-discrediting form of "humor" out there. I mean, how many times did we all want to groan upon hearing "Barack Osama" or "John McLame?"
I admit I'm partial to Rays fans calling Vinny Castilla "Vinny Cashsteala," however. For whatever reason, that one makes me laugh.
For two wild-cards. If you can't win your division, you should have to play a sudden-death game just to earn the RIGHT to get into the playoffs.
Beyond that, five games or seven for the division series matters not. I want excitement on the Monday after the season ends though...
(Al K - managed to miss your comment there. Just consider this echoing your sentiments...)
Hosted by Dane Cook.
So much for that idea. Not even naked cheerleaders could get me to watch.
Hideki I-rob-you was also funny. Not as funny as fat toad, though.
It's not so far-fetched. That kind of did happen in the AL Central this year.
I don't mind it as an idea--it's interesting to think how the pitching matchups might be arranged--but it won't fly due to decreased TV revenues.
Not even if they were naked <u>female</u> cheerleaders?
That makes it better, but it would require some Big Lebowski like blanket tossing of large breasted naked cheerleaders resembling Kate Beckinsale being filmed from a bird's eye view to make up for a Dane Cook appearance. That's all I'm saying.
In a one-game playoff, the better team, if it gets home field, has 58% chance of winning.
In a five-game playoff, 3 at home 2 on the road, the better team has a 60% chance of winning.
2% is nothing. If the better team doesn't get home field -- which unlikely given the talent difference I've assumed, and besides if the much better team can't get home field in a 162 game season, it's their own fault -- the better team has a 52% chance of winning in one game and 58% in five.
This is why the mainstream deservedly hates sabermetrics.
tattoos
I'm trying to remember if there were mandatory league rules for playoffs back before 1969, or if they just improvised. The three NL playoffs ('46, '51, '62) were 2-of-3, but 1948 in the AL was a one-game playoff. One-game playoffs have a very special air to them. If they became routine they would become, well, unmemorable.
I could go for some of those shortened days... Perhaps eliminate the hours between 9 am and noon, and between 2 pm and 5? That would speed things up by a full 25%.
Of course, it will never happen - both teams want to sell playoff tickets.
The assumption that one team has a 55% chance of winning on any given day during a short series is off. The value of the 5 game series over a 1 game series (and a 7 game series over a 5) is not in the additional 2% increase it gives the 55% team. The value is in forcing that 55% team to play close to 55%, because in baseball no one is 55% day in and day out. On any given day that 55% team could swing from 40%-60% (or whatever) do to favorable matchups and depth, particularly the starting pitchers. The more games you have to play the more exposed teams become. If the 45% team is running out Pedro Martinez in his prime in game one, and the equivalents of Dustin Moseley in games two through five I would love their chances in a 1 game playoff vs a 5 game series.
At a neutral location, obv. Wouldn't want things to get out of hand
Memorable?
How many of the one-game playoffs since 1948 do you remember?
--
Take a page from the 1948 BAA (one NBA predecessor).
Let me illustrate with a baseball example drawn completely at random. . . .
it's the National League of 1981
The two most accomplished teams, whom the true fans most want to see, match up in a best-of-7 series, planned for 9 days including two travel days off.
St Louis 4-3 Cincinnati [played on days 1-2, 4-5-6, 8-9 same as modern base ball best-of-7]
Meanwhile the next four teams match up in back-to-back best-of-3 series.
Montreal 2-1 Philadelphia [played on days 1-2-3]
Los Angeles 2-1 Houston [played on days 1-2-3]
Los Angeles 2-1 Montreal [played on days 5, 7-8]
Then
St Louis meets Los Angeles in a best-of-7 that opens in St Louis, planned for 9 days including two travel days off.
That is essentially the 60-year old NBA model.
An alternative probably better for modern baseball, and "much more likely" to be adopted although n * 0 = 0, is that "Los Angeles and Montreal" in my example play best-of-5, planned for days 5-6-7-8-9.
- one semifinal matching the two highest rank teams ; they could be winners of two divisions
- one semifinal matching the next four teams, completed during the same period of time
Again?
And you really wouldn't have been happy if the Dodgers won this year.
Pom-poms of course.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main