What the hell is wrong with you people? Not a single Cub logo on the board? Turn in your badges..reality is nothing but a crutch for those who can’t handle drugs.
I actually thought about putting the Cubs in as a Wild Card but figured I’d be laughed at for being a homer.
Interesting that only a couple people had a WC team advancing to the World Series. No one had a WC team winning it all. I think that’s the biggest change you’ll see for however long Selig keeps this setup. It’s far more reasonable to expect a WC team that’s already blown it’s No. 1 starter will struggle in a short division series. Very possible a team like the Giants could win a WC and never get to throw Lincecum in the NLDS, and certainly not twice. Plus that one game WC playoff might eliminate a red-hot WC team like the Rockies from a few years back.
Same here. I think it’s possible with the new WC format that they’ll be playing meaningful baseball in September, but I gave the advantage to the teams out of the East and West. I think this will be a down year for the Central across the board.
Agreed. Selig has sapped the value from both WC spots. Too bad he was a season too late to give the Cardinals an early exit.
You were one of the three – so I’m going to pick a brotherly fight – are you for real with not having the Red Sox on there? I know Bobby V could send that team into the toilet (maybe that’s your reasoning), I just have a hard time seeing them “respond” to everything that’s happened since the final day of 2011 by NOT making the playoffs. Maybe they won’t win the division, but I have to believe they’re securing at least a WC spot.
I almost left off the Yankees and gave the Red Sox the WC spot. Ultimately I thought there pitching was a tad shakier than the Yankees. But if you’re asking if I feel good about picking against Gonzalez and Crawford (who I do expect to “respond” this season), the answer is no.
Do you really see three teams coming out of the NL East?
If you’re going to do it this way, it should at least be the 5 best records. I don’t care if they win a division. The 2 worst records should be the wild cards. Why should a 99-win wild card from a strong division have to burn their ace, but a weak 86-game division winner gets to line up their rotation?
And speaking of lining up pitching, all the division winners get to do that with this new format, even if they are fighting to the last day to make the playoffs.
not if they have to start there ace on game 162
They get an extra day off which will allow them to throw them in game 2 on 3 days rest
And probably for the best. Division winners should be rewarded with some sort of advantage in the playoffs.
By your logic, divisions are irrelevant. If it’s going to be the best records, why not return to dem olden days when it was just the AL and NL?
Sounds good to me. The NBA does it that way.
This is nice, Joe, I like it. It will be fun to look back at the end of the season and see how we did!
It’s not so much 3 great teams from the NL East as it is I hated the rest of my NL options. I don’t see multiple teams from the West – the Dodgers were the lesser of the bad teams, I could be persuaded that any team in that division could win it. The Central is a slap-fight between one-armed teams. Whereas the East at least has some legit teams, I could be convinced that anyone but the Mets could make the playoffs.
Joe, I remember fondly when we did this. Thanks for reprising the staff predictions. I recall when 3 or 4 of us were carrying the water for the site, You have a plethora of writers now. Congratulations!
I agree. Two leagues, no division, top 4 make the playoff (or 5 or whatever)
The AL East is filled with good teams, that I wish I didn’t pick both WC’s from there. I think the AL West will have one of them.
Yeah, I think the Angels and Rangers are going to be able to beat up on the A’s and Mariner’s to an extent the Rays, Yankees and Red Sox won’t be able to do against at least the Blue Jays.
NFL is symmetrical 8 divisions with 4 in each division. MLB could folow suit, add 2 teams and reallign. What I hate about the divisions is that the Cubs have 6 teams and the AL West only has four. Not fair!
I agree with this as optimal, but doubt it will happen because a lot of teams wouldn’t want to give up the schedule that is currently weighted towards playing “rivals” 16-18 times a year.
No the NBA does NOT do it that way. All NBA division champions WILL make the playoffs regardless of their record. It’s highly unlikely that with 8 seeds a division winner would ever have the 9th best record, but it’s true nonetheless.
For all intents and purposes they do since everyone plays the same schedule. It’s highly unlikely that a division winner will cause someone to get shafted, and if it does, I think they will change it
Also interesting that we all picked 5 postseason participants from only 6 AL teams…there’s not a whole lot of surprise in the AL it seems. Either the AL East gets 3 or the AL West gets 2.
But there are 11 different teams that were picked (by at least two people even!) to make the playoffs in the NL. The five not picked – Astros, Pirates, Mets, Padres, and our Cubs.
They don’t all play the same schedule in the NBA. This year is a bit different because of the shortened season, but typically you play in your division 4 times, other teams in your conference 3 or 4 times, and the other conference 2 times.
There is no major sport that I know of segregated by divisions/conferences where you aren’t rewarded with postseason play for winning your division/conference.
In each conference they practically do play the same schedule. You play 4 games with everyone in your division, a home-and-home with the other conference, and then the rest of the teams in your conference, there is a set rotation that determines which teams u will play 3 times instead of 4. Let the division winners raise a banner and sell hats and shirts, but they’re only in if they earn it. Why should a 85 win team make the playoffs simply because they play in a lousy division while a 99 win team doesn’t because they play in a tougher division?
most years a surprise team gets in. Hope it’s Dale’s boys.
The SFG argument from 1993. And with an unbalanced schedule in MLB you can’t simply look at the wins by the top team in the division to determine which is better. You’re better looking at divisional win-loss records for that…every division is .500 against themselves, show me what they do collectively outside of that division if you want to make a case one is better than the other.
Also, did you know every divisional winner for the last two years won at least 90 games?
my small daughter is on my shoulder, keeping me from photoshopping ‘dale’s boys’ onto shark’s jersey from the pervy stock pic…
By the way CAPS, it’s a false argument in the WC era. In 2007, the Cubs made it with 85 wins, the Padres finished 3rd in the NL West with 89 wins and missed out. In 2005 the Phillies finished with 88 wins in second place and the Padres won their division with 82 wins. In 1997 the Astros only won 84 but played in October while both the Mets and Dodgers had 88 wins and went home. That’s it…every other “difference” where a division winner finished behind a team that went home was 3 games or less.
So twice since 1993 a division winner has won 4 fewer games than a team that didn’t qualify for the playoffs, and once that division winner has won 6 fewer games. It’s important to note that none of the teams that were sent home won 90 games. Never in the WC era has a team won 90+ games, finished ahead of a division winner by a significant margin (I’m defining that as more than 3 games), and missed out on the playoffs. It just hasn’t happened – and the new rules make it a lot harder for that to happen.
I like the Reds in the NL Central. Cardinals do not make the post season. I like Arizona in the west. Where does Ozzie and Zambrano end up? In the standings that is, the trunk of a car or at the bottom of the Carribean in cement shoes doesn’t count.
Where do Ozzie and Bozo end up? Out of a job, that’s where. LMAO. I’ve been looking on Stubhub for tickets for the series, I can get them cheaper there than on the Marlins website. I thought the new stadium was supposed to increase demand.
That IS “increased demand.” At the old stadium, they’d have paid you to attend.
So now instead of being paid 10 bucks to go to a game, I’m paying 5 bucks? I think you forgot to adjust for inflation.
My two cents (probably worth less)…
AL East: Yankees
AL Central: Tigers
AL West: Rangers
WC: Red Sox
NL East: Phillies
NL Central: Brewers
NL West: Giants
World Series: Angels over Brewers
So what’s the wager?