Comments on: The Expanded Playoffs or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the wild card

By: skeealaska

skeealaska — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 10:31:43 +0000

Craig, I pretty much agree with everything you say but lets face it, one only has to listen to The Bud speak to realize stupid is as stupid does. No one but The Bud could have come up with the All-Star joke of assigning WS home field advantage based on an exhibition game. Style over substance, that would be The Bud. Some day we are gonna have a 120 win team v. an 81 game winner and the 81′s will get home field. Dunceville personified. Yeah, and The Bud be like, “See, my idea works!” Kinda like the trending of society these days, rewards for mediocrity vs. accomplishment.

By: sarcasticks

sarcasticks — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 00:27:40 +0000

Don’t forget that the Seahawks BEAT the Saints in the first round of the playoffs. The Seahawks got in, and made the most of it. If there’s not always five playoff caliber teams, what makes you think there are always four? And how do you define “playoff caliber.”

Yes, some things that people feel are injustices will happen. The Phillies had the best record in baseball last year and their victories over the Braves at the end of the season got the Cardinals into the playoffs. And of course, we know what happened after that.

There’s no justice in sports. No one deserves anything. More teams and more do or die games equals more excitement and a better product. If you want tradition you can always go watch the local men’s league Saturday softball games.

By: sarcasticks

sarcasticks — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 00:18:31 +0000

Change is good. Everything changes. Holding on to old, stagnant ideas with the simple reasoning of tradition is foolish. People are almost always resistant to change at first. It makes them uncomfortable. But we will all get used to the new format. And in a few years’ time we’ll get a good feeling on how the game has gotten better, or worse because of it. If it really does turn out badly, baseball can always change again. That’s life.

By: humanexcrement

humanexcrement — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 05:29:20 +0000

This is going to result in the problem the NFL has. I call it the 2010 Seattle Seahawks Conundrum. Sooner or later, probably in the first year, we’re going to see a craptastic team with a .500 or sub-.500 record getting into the playoffs. I HATE IT, absolutely HATE it when an 8-8 team or, as in the case last year, a 7-9 team gets into the playoffs while a team with 10 or 11 wins stays home because the NFL has too many divisions. Something similar will happen in baseball–a team a second-place team that still has 90 or 100 wins is going to have to play some mediocre squad like Oakland or Cleveland just to get into the actual playoffs. Read Joe Posnanski’s article on the subject, in which he winds back the clock and shows what kind of half-assed, lame duck teams would have made it to that one-game playoff simply because somebody would have had to. There simply aren’t always five baseball teams in each league that are playoff caliber. Four, yes. But five? If you’re only the fifth-best team in the league, do you really deserve a one-game shot to upset a team that is potentially actually better than the winners of other divisions? I vote no, but of course no one consulted me on the issue. This isn’t like the DH rule, which we can easily reconcile. Don’t like the DH rule? Don’t watch the AL. Don’t like pitcher batting? Don’t watch the NL. But this doesn’t give us that option. Some really good teams are going to lose their whole season because their fourth starter had a bad day.

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 03:45:31 +0000

Pitchers used to hit okay, in fact, not much worse than catchers or SS…then at some point it became okay for them to not be able to hit at all.

No, they didn’t. Not ever. At their best, pitchers had aggregate wRC+s in the low forties. The last time they were above forty was 1920, back when pitchers pitched a greater portion of games (and by extension, batted a greater portion). They’ve been in the positive double digits once since 1960. Catchers, on the other hand, started out in the seventies and now generally sit in the high eighties to low nineties. But sure, let’s pretend there was once only a small difference between pitchers and catchers.

By: nothanksimdriving123

nothanksimdriving123 — Sat, 19 Nov 2011 00:42:47 +0000

OK, the game has survived, though not necessarily always been improved by, such changes as: the switch to overhand pitching; the number of balls and strikes; the use of gloves by fielders and later, batters; racial segregation and later, reintegration (yay!); electric lights and night baseball; batting helmets; airplane travel; the DH; pre-World Series playoffs; artificial turf (mostly gone now, yay); roofs over ball parks; performance enhancing drugs (boooo); limited use of replays on home run calls; and on and on. And yet, “purists” insist we never ever expand replay use to help fallible umpires get more calls right, such as safe or out, because thus improving the integrity of games’ outcomes would somehow ruin the sport. Sigh.

By: natstowngreg

natstowngreg — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 23:57:14 +0000

Pitchers being baseball players — wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, …
Baseball > Football — right, right, right, right, …

By: stex52

stex52 — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 23:16:26 +0000

Make that “teams.”

By: stex52

stex52 — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 22:59:05 +0000

You can write me off as a disgruntled Houston fan, but I think the logic above is right. Now that there will be interleague play every day, there will not be two sets of rules. DH will win. I am not happy about it, but I now think it is just a matter of (a short) time. I’m with you other NL guys in thinking it takes a big part out of the game. But it’s all about more money.

Like adding wild cards until we are like pro basketball. We will eventually play the season to eliminate half the times.

By: stex52

stex52 — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 22:38:12 +0000

Unfortunately, baseball has given up its Purity Of Essence.

By: stlouis1baseball

stlouis1baseball — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 21:30:32 +0000

That is exactly what I stated earlier Jonny. You field. You throw. You hit.
I will never understand why they concept is so confusing to people.
Baseball includes fielding…throwing…and hitting.
You field. You throw. You hit.

By: stlouis1baseball

stlouis1baseball — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 21:22:52 +0000

Richard Cranium!

By: stlouis1baseball

stlouis1baseball — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 21:20:54 +0000

Yeah…what Paper said.

By: Jonny 5

Jonny 5 — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 20:38:14 +0000

Why does every player need to be good at hitting anyway? That pitcher who really isn’t all that great at hitting adds strategy whether you like it or not. Do we pinch hit for him? is it too early in the game to lose him and depend on the bull pen? Do we walk the guy in front of him with 2 outs expecting to get him out? Having no DH with the pitcher hitting is more true to the game, everyone who picks up a bat also plays defense, with a glove. It is how it should be.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:53:57 +0000

Exactly.

Pitchers used to hit okay, in fact, not much worse than catchers or SS…then at some point it became okay for them to not be able to hit at all. Pitchers can only work on pitching so much….in no way would that work interfere with the ability to work on their hitting. They simply aren’t required to do it. Everybody has to play offense and defense except for AL pitchers and DHs, if everybody else can do it….so can those guys.

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:33:44 +0000

Too bad we have a hundred years of history telling us this doesn’t happen. The specialization of the pitcher role rendered a pitcher’s ability to hit insignificant.

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:31:58 +0000

Except that’s not strategy, that’s automatic. There’s little strategy involved when one hitter is significantly worse than the next.

By: theonlynolan

theonlynolan — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:28:13 +0000

It’s hard enough for a pitcher to be good at pitching. Telling him he should figure out how to hit above .200 in addition to his regular pitching duties is unrealistic. Unless I’m mistaken minor leagues don’t have their pitchers bat either. So there’s no real opportunity for these pitchers to practice against live arms. If the teams wanted them to hit they would’ve been signed as a position player rather than a pitcher.

By: Jonny 5

Jonny 5 — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:17:17 +0000

If you play offense, you also need to play defense. If you’re substituted for, you stay out of the game. it’s simple. This whole pinch hitting for the pitcher but letting him stay in the game just seems like cheating to me….

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:16:10 +0000

Typically, catchers (the worst hitters) have an average OPS+ around 90, while first basemen (the best hitters) have an average OPS+ around 120. Pitchers have an average OPS+ around 0. There’s no slippery slope, there’s a chasm.

By: Jonny 5

Jonny 5 — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:09:24 +0000

Man, they play offense and defense, or at least try to anyway… Switching out players every inning is weak man. Once you take a man out he needs to stay out. You did get me on the whole “skill” thing though. nice job. ;>P

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:09:17 +0000

Do we really need to run down the litany of ways the game has changed (for the better) since it was founded?

By: churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged

churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:08:28 +0000

Did you ever watch Zambranno (and others) at bat. He is very feared, not just because he is nuts, but he can hit

Wait, the Carlos Zambrano who’s a career .241/.251/.395 hitter with 10 walks to 232 strikeouts? Why is this guy feared? It’s obvious if he gets the bat on the ball he might be able to hit it out, but why throw him anything he can square up?

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:06:31 +0000

Thanks, stlouis1baseball. ‘Twas an opportunity I couldn’t refuse.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:03:32 +0000

The point is that it isn’t required for pitchers to not be able to hit…to me, the better solution is for pitchers to learn how to hit just like every other player….not to have lumbering oafs pinch hit for them.

By: Jonny 5

Jonny 5 — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:02:54 +0000

Ding Ding! Funny, that’s what my son calls his.

By: JBerardi

JBerardi — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:51:53 +0000

But sac bunts are exciting!

By: JBerardi

JBerardi — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:49:03 +0000

Yeah, pitchers hitting is a real display of “skill”.

By: theonlynolan

theonlynolan — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:48:29 +0000

I wish there were a way to directly reply to comments on my phone. To say that middle infielders and catchers need DHs too because they cant hit is a ridiculous assertion. The average pitcher’s OPS is far lower than any other position player and to say otherwise is to deny reality. Citing Zambrano, Gallardo and a half dozen other pitchers who can handle the stick and using that as evidence that pitchers can hit ignores 95 percent of the plate appearances from the position. It’s laughable to suggest a pitcher laying down a sac bunt or managing to extend an at bat to 5 or 6 pitches is more exciting than Ortiz, Napoli, Thome, or Guerrero hitting a baseball. And to claim it’s tradition that the two leagues play by separate rules ignores that the DH position was first created almost 100 years after the National League was formed.

By: natstowngreg

natstowngreg — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:45:59 +0000

Agree, but think it unfair to protray Bud as just a mouthpiece. in the smoke-filled room, Bud is the one responsible for getting the 30 owners together. For better or worse.