Three-way WC tie-breaker not fair

[Convo]

If the Rays, Rangers, and Indians all tie the Rays and Indians match-up first and the loser plays the Rangers for the final WC spot. So essentially the Rays and Indians get two chances to make a play-off berth while the Rangers only get one?

 

Doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Am I missing something or is this totally bogus? Honestly if all teams have the same regular season record no team should have an advantage other than home-field advantage (which could be determined a couple ways).

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/mlb-announces-al-wild-card-tiebreaker-procedure-for-rays-indians-rangers?ymd=20130927&content_id=61932312&vkey=news_mlb

[John_Havok]

Seems to make perfect sense to me. The team with the best combined record between the three teams chooses what they want, the team with the second best record chooses what they want and the team with the third best record doesn't get a choice and only 1 chance to advance.

 

What would be an alternative? Round robin style and runs for and against used to determine any tie breakers?

[guylaroche5]

If the Rays, Rangers, and Indians all tie the Rays and Indians match-up first and the loser plays the Rangers for the final WC spot. So essentially the Rays and Indians get two chances to make a play-off berth while the Rangers only get one?

 

Doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Am I missing something or is this totally bogus? Honestly if all teams have the same regular season record no team should have an advantage other than home-field advantage (which could be determined a couple ways).

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/mlb-announces-al-wild-card-tiebreaker-procedure-for-rays-indians-rangers?ymd=20130927&content_id=61932312&vkey=news_mlb

 

fastest way to break the deadlock. it took into account the records among the 3 and the rangers had the worst one. there are no other alternatives that don't involve a round robin which is completely out of the question given the MLB doesn't want to keep the other teams waiting

[Convo]

I agree the alternatives aren't great, I still think it's BS for Texas.

[John_Havok]

And if they win they'll have only burned 1 SP, before the wildcard. The team that loses the first game, say they win the second game, they'll have burned two starters before they even get to the wildcard game, and 3 guys if they win the Wildcard. Not exactly prime going into game 1 of the next round with your # 4 guy

[Convo]

And if they win they'll have only burned 1 SP, before the wildcard. The team that loses the first game, say they win the second game, they'll have burned two starters before they even get to the wildcard game, and 3 guys if they win the Wildcard. Not exactly prime going into game 1 of the next round with your # 4 guy

 

Not a great argument. I would think making the play-offs in the first place is slightly more important that not having your better starter out there. The simple fact is two teams get two chances, one team gets one chance. Just because there isn't another workable option doesn't make this a good format.

Edited September 28, 2013 by Convo

[Abomination]

And if they win they'll have only burned 1 SP, before the wildcard. The team that loses the first game, say they win the second game, they'll have burned two starters before they even get to the wildcard game, and 3 guys if they win the Wildcard. Not exactly prime going into game 1 of the next round with your # 4 guy

 

If there's no break (or only 1 day) in between the end of the season and the wildcard games, teams can't really line their starting staff up anyway. Every day leading up to the playoff is the most important game of the season for them, it's not like they can delay a guy for a game or two to line things up or they might get eliminated before the wildcard game occurs. That's one of the big advantages for the division winner, they have a few days where they CAN line up the pitching.

[John_Havok]

Not a great argument. I would think making the play-offs in the first place is slightly more important that not having your better starter out there. The simple fact is two teams get two chances, one team gets one chance. Just because there isn't another workable option doesn't make this a good format.

 

It wasn't an argument defending the procedure, just pointing out the silver lining for the Rangers.

[jaysfaithful8]

Rock paper scissors tournament solves any tie-breaking issues.

[TheHurl]

Not a great argument. I would think making the play-offs in the first place is slightly more important that not having your better starter out there. The simple fact is two teams get two chances, one team gets one chance. Just because there isn't another workable option doesn't make this a good format.

 

What's the difference between a tie-breaker and the wildcard playoff?

[G-Snarls]

What's the difference between a tie-breaker and the wildcard playoff?

 

Exactly. Not much. That's why so many people refer to the Wildcard game as a "play in" rather that "playoff" game

 

It's exciting but losing a one game wildcard is devastating and not a very satisfying accomplishment to have made it if you lose.

[TheHurl]

I'd still say the team that loses the wildcard game had a "successful" season. It may sting for a few weeks, but eventually those fans will see it the same way.

 

But losing the tiebreaker is unsuccessful?

[G-Snarls]

If the Rays, Rangers, and Indians all tie the Rays and Indians match-up first and the loser plays the Rangers for the final WC spot. So essentially the Rays and Indians get two chances to make a play-off berth while the Rangers only get one?

 

Doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Am I missing something or is this totally bogus? Honestly if all teams have the same regular season record no team should have an advantage other than home-field advantage (which could be determined a couple ways).

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/mlb-announces-al-wild-card-tiebreaker-procedure-for-rays-indians-rangers?ymd=20130927&content_id=61932312&vkey=news_mlb

 

Tabby agrees. Just discussed it on the air.

[G-Snarls]

But losing the tiebreaker is unsuccessful?

 

Since you had to win ~ 90 games to make the wildcard that's a successful season. (Depending a bit on your level of expectation and payroll of course.)

[Convo]

It wasn't an argument defending the procedure, just pointing out the silver lining for the Rangers.

 

Ahh, okay good

[admin]

I'd rather see TB get in than Texas. I wish we were playing Texas tomorrow and beat them.

[Abomination]

It would make me extremely happy if we prevented the Rays from making the playoffs. They have kicked are ass for 5 straight years. It would be nice to have a little payback. The unbelievable part is were doing it without our 3 best players.

 

3 best players? We're basically doing it without ALL our players except Lawrie and Reyes.