Wild Card 2 - fer and agin'

 ...............

=== PRO ===

Most baseball teams should be in the pennant race ... on Opening Day.  Baseball is for kids.  It is not for postgrad students, and for sure it should not be co-opt'ed by postgrad students.

This entire discussion about Prince Fielder is fundamentally idiotic.  You have home town fans weeping and wailing that their home team might try to win.  

This is an idiotic situation.  

*See comments - not the arguments for and against Fielder, and not the arguments that winning could be done better without Fielder.  But many hometown fans argue -- in March -- that "the Mariners shouldn't be pretending to be in a race they're not really in," and to the extent that they're right, the overarch'ing system is idiotic.  :- )

The 5th playoff team remedies this situation.  It is indisputable that, with the 5th team, you will have many fewer home town fans begging, in December, that their home teams try to lose in the coming year.  QED.

.

=== CON ===

The argument from the best baseball analysts is that  --- > the old Wild Card team, the #4 team, usually had a better record than some division winner had.

The #5 team usually is a considerably weaker team than the #4 team, or so it is asserted.

Dr. D grants that this is one of the stronger arguments against a 2nd Wild Card.  If you wish to make sure that no "weakie" teams get into the postseason, "embarrassing" baseball, then you would avoid the 2nd Wild Card.

It's got some traction.  I could see some dubious #5 teams making the WC playoff.  (But lemme say that if the 1996, Junior-ARod-Edgar Mariners are the squirrelliest team we're going to see, that's all right with me.)

.

=== PRO ===
 
You remember the 1995 elimination game like it was yesterday.
 
Mark Langston, sweaty and having fought like a lion, sitting on home plate trying not to cry.  That game was sports war at its most gloriously bloody.
 
We're talking about having a game like that -- Felix against Verlander, maybe -- every year.
 
.
=== CON ===
 
The concept of the 2001 Oakland A's, having won 102 games, having to play a 50-50 game against the 85-win Minnesota Twins.
 
This will be the Wild Card Elimination Game at its worst -- when there are 10 or more games' gap between the two teams.
 
........
 
It doesn't bother me much.  The 1998 Yankees, having won 114 games, had to play a short 5-game series against the 88-win Texas Rangers.  What would Joe DiMaggio have said about that?  But nowadays, nobody complained.  We're just used to it.
 
The blow would have been softened by the fact that the A's could easily set their ace for the elimination game.  
 
Pundits complain that any baseball game is a 50-50 coin flip, but it isn't a coin flip if you have Justin Verlander against Jarrod Washburn.  Some baseball odds games are 2:1 or more.  When a team runs away with the #4 playoff spot, it can position itself towards a 70% chance of winning the elimination game.
 
.
=== PRO ===
 
The entire landscape of baseball will be changed in September, toward the "more tense and exciting."
 
Most of the time, the race for the 5th spot will go down to the last day or two.  Often involving multiple teams.
 
...........
 
As a completely separate issue, I love the fact that winning a division is now a very important accomplishment.  The Wild Cards not only face a Harvey "Two-Face" Dent coin flip of death, but they will also be missing their aces as they go up against a great team.
 

Comments

1

 
This entire discussion about Prince Fielder is fundamentally idiotic.  You havehome town fans weeping and wailing that their home team might try to win.  
This is an idiotic situation.
 
Now be fair, man.  The reasoned arguments against Fielder (Sandy) or betting the farm to win "now" (eg Taro last year) are not arguments against trying to win.  These arguments take the form that 1) such a move will do less than expected to help the team in the short run (or at least deliver an unpredictable level of benefit), and 2) will damage longer term chances of winning.  I understand you're arguing about a situation, but this paragraph almost sounds like something you might see at some other blog.
 
 
 
 

2

The paragraph was kind of tongue-in-cheek, my man Sandy in on the joke, laughing with him, rather than at him.
................
Those arguments (like yours) that maintain we should fight for the pennant, but that Fielder is not the right way to do that, those arguments are not in view.  I respect those arguments 100%.
What I see, mostly, is arguments that we should avoid big commitments because the M's aren't ready to win yet.
...............
As you acknowledged, in no way am I saying that the reasoning is not sound, or that the supporters are being silly.  :- )
I'm opining that the nature of the situation is nonsensical.  To the extent that the system nukes a team's season before it even begins, to that extent the system is defeating its own purpose.
In fact, I would acknowledge (say) Sandy's arguments as reasonable, but oppose a system that would make such arguments reasonable.
Taro (for whom my vast respect is obvious) argues yearly that the Mariners are foolishly trying to be in races 'that they're not really in.'  He might be right.  If so, the system has been broken IMHO.
............
In every sport, a truly inept organization is going to suffer consequences, but in MLB you've got most "decent" orgs ruled out in March ...
::daps::

3

I certainly took no offense.
In truth, the more I study and look for data contrary to my position, the more I find data that suggests that adding a superstar to a bad team is actually detrimental.
I would describe my position at this point as "yes, I believe Fielder would hurt the club in the long run."
But, I would also say, I believe if the club IS ready to win in 2012, then Fielder would actually be detrimental to that end. 
But, I accept that when your argument basically comes down to "adding a 5 WAR player will make the team worse with him than without" it's not going to get a lot of traction.  So, that hasn't been the focus of my arguements.

4
Taro's picture

I love this move. It gives other teams a chance. Only tweak would be to make it the teams with the two lowest records facing each other in an elimination round. Its unfair to the WC teams that are better than the division winners.
Another side-effect of the bargaining agreement:
HGH BLOOD testing. A MUCH bigger change to the testing than what was done in 2004 and 2005. This could be quite impactful depending on whether these are one-time ST tests or done randomly during the season.

5
Taro's picture

John Jaso for Lueke.
Excellent move IMO.
Buying low on a lefty C with several years of control left. Good plate discipline and contact ability, good speed for a C, BABIP will likely rebound to slightly below-average. Defense hard to evaluate at C, but a poor arm.

6

good thing.  Olivo with 90 starts and Jaso with the rest would be a big upgrade from last year.  If Adam Moore has a good Spring training then we have another trade chip in Olivo or Moore.
Lueke was most definately expendible.  He might end up being a very good reliever but the M's have quite a few relievers who fit the profile that Lueke holds.  The Cliff Lee deal looks better to me now with Jaso, Beaven and Smoak for Aumont, Ramirez, Lowe and Gilles.
 

7

He is exactly the kind of prospect that I think has the highest chance of success: he produced XBH and walks while keeping strikouts low.
Just scan his lines: 20+ doubles over and over; 10+ HR; Ackley-like K/BB ratios (as in hyper-low Ks but still drawing walks and producing XBH).
In fact, his AA season in 2007 (.316/.408/.484) was as good (statistically) as what Ackley did in the minors, and better than what any of our other prospects have done (including Catricala, Seager and Franklin).
Only quibble is that he was a tad old for his levels, but not so old that you'd throw out the results.
His only bad professional season was 2011, when he had a .244 BABIP and a couple of injuries.  Looks like he was pressing through the bad luck and injuries and his eye suffered, but I don't see any major red flags.  His 2010 was very much what you would have expected from his minor-league track record.
HUGE bounce-back potential.
This very much looks like adding another LH bat somewhere between Seager and Ackley in quality, but at catcher.

8

than a lefty-swinging MLB catcher.  The whole stadium looks more colorful.
Well, maybe a freshman tight end who's going top 10 in the draft.  And maybe a 98-mph rookie who leads the league in fewest walks and highest amount of announcers "betting that he goes 3 bills at least."
But except for that.

Add comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><p><br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

shout_filter

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.