|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 3, 2019 13:06:14 GMT -5
Should we reseed the playoff seedings after the wildcard round?
This means that if a league's best two records were in the same division (as has been the case three times already in the league's four year history) then they would meet in the two-week LCS rather than the one-week LDS (assuming they both progressed to that stage of the playoffs).
Voting will open on October 21. This thread will remain open to allow for discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 4, 2019 9:49:05 GMT -5
My personal 2 cents:
I support this change. I think it would be good for our game if the best two regular season records in a league always met in a two week playoff matchup (assuming that they had won their previous playoff encounters).
|
|
|
|
Post by saltman (Mark, NYM) on Oct 7, 2019 7:50:01 GMT -5
i'm inclined to leave the seedings as they are
1) maintain alignment with MLB
2) the schedule is not balanced so some teams get more opportunity than others to beat up on the weakest teams. so best record does not necessarily mean best team, could just mean easiest schedule. and having the 2 best records in the same division would give weight to this argument
|
|
|
|
Post by Braves GM (Eric) on Oct 7, 2019 12:08:12 GMT -5
I think if we were to do this, we might consider Roto placement instead of record. Like Mets points out, divisions are not evenly matched, so record might not get us to 'two best teams meet in the CS if they win the DS'. BUT, if we were to consider the Roto placement (you can search for these hypothetical 'Point Totals' in Fantrax Standings), you might come out with a better approximation of the 'best teams' sans schedule strength.
Of course, the winner of the league was 5th, runner-up was 3rd, TJ was 2nd, and I was 1st by this measure, so this might not be helpful or fair, either. It just so happened that I played the #2,3,5,6,8, and 11th 'best teams' in the regular season, which definitely affected my record.
All this is to say, I think we should keep it as is. Seems like we're trying to make rules to fit one year's strangeness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 7, 2019 12:33:05 GMT -5
I think if we were to do this, we might consider Roto placement instead of record. Like Mets points out, divisions are not evenly matched, so record might not get us to 'two best teams meet in the CS if they win the DS'. BUT, if we were to consider the Roto placement (you can search for these hypothetical 'Point Totals' in Fantrax Standings), you might come out with a better approximation of the 'best teams' sans schedule strength. Mets' point has me less supportive of this change than I previously was. But, don't forget, each of those teams has also had to face a top-2 team twice. I definitely don't think the Roto placement should have anything to do with anything. We play a H2H weekly league, and make our lineup decisions accordingly. They don't necessarily match (and often conflict with) the interests of an end of season roto standing. Seems like we're trying to make rules to fit one year's strangeness. I think we've had the top two records in a league in the same division 3 times in our 4 seasons. |
|
|
|
Post by Braves GM (Eric) on Oct 7, 2019 13:07:42 GMT -5
My point is that if our goal is to give the 'best teams' the opportunity to have two weeks to play each other, then record might not be the best measure. The top 10 teams in the Point Totals made it to the playoffs, so they are fairly predictive. I'd venture to say the three years this has happened has had just as much to do with a weak division as the happenstance of the two 'best teams' being in the same division. 2017 and 2019 both saw the #2 and #3 teams in Roto wind up with the best records, with the #1 team being from a different division but in the same league. Each year it worked out that this #1 team played one of the #2/#3 teams in the CS (at least I think Bert played Diamondbacks in the NLCS in 2017).
Both Reds and Pirates were given 20 wins just by being in the same division with Bert. Not to take anything away from them, but determining who the 'best teams' are by record might result in this happening over and over again. It would also be a problem if the majority of years one division met in a CS because we allowed records to trump division winners.
At the end of the day, the teams are so close at the top that we might be making just as many problems as we're fixing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 7, 2019 14:35:59 GMT -5
At the end of the day, the teams are so close at the top that we might be making just as many problems as we're fixing. This is quite true. |
|
|
|
Post by Pirates GM (TJ) on Oct 7, 2019 14:53:43 GMT -5
It's not likely to affect me a second time (it hasn't been a repeat issue for the Astros-Rangers or the Padres-Diamondbacks). So my support for this measure is about how it will affect other teams not my own.
But I think Cubs and Brewers might take umbrage to Eric's suggestion that the NL Central was a "weak division" this past season.
Record outside their own division (games over .500):
+64 Pirates (NLC champ)
+58 Reds
+52 Rangers (ALW Champ)
+45 Rays (ALE Champ)
+33 Braves (NLE Champ)
+29 Yankees
+25 Royals (ALC Champ)
+24 Cubs
+23 Brewers
+14 Indians
+11 Mets
+10 Red Sox
+10 Athletics
+6 Padres (NLW Champ)
+5 Astros
+1 Phillies
-2 Rockies
-4 Twins
-5 Giants
-9 Diamondbacks
-9 Nationals
-15 Blue Jays
-18 Dodgers
-24 Angels
-26 Tigers
-45 Marlins
-46 White Sox
-59 Mariners
-61 Orioles
-87 Cardinals
The Brewers and Cubs were each better than the 2nd best team in four different divisions, and better than the division champion of one. Yes, Bert was an also ran this season. But 4 of the top 9 teams in our league were in the NL Central, and there is no argument to be made that it wasn't the toughest division in our league this season.
Composite interdivision records:
+82 NL Central
+8 AL East
-9 NL East
-18 AL West
-28 NL West
-35 AL Central
|
|
|
|
Post by Braves GM (Eric) on Oct 7, 2019 16:40:42 GMT -5
I wasn't meaning to give umbrage. The NL Central was a beast. You guys put together great squads. I was really just concentrating on having 20 wins given to you by Cards. That's not something that happens every year. It would've also made the Brewers and Cubs 20 wins richer, as well, but my general point is that records can be misleading when given the task of 'choosing the better team' between close teams.
So, having a rule that possibly puts a Wild Card team 'ahead' of a division winner based solely upon them being the 'better team' might be muddying the water for no reason. I wasn't attacking anybody, just pointing out that this isn't likely to have a perfect solution, and that our 'solution' might just lead to other problems. Therefore, maybe just leave it alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 16, 2019 8:03:44 GMT -5
Just a reminder that this vote will be opening on October 21st - with the poll remaining open for 1 week.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rangers GM (Stephen) on Oct 28, 2019 4:37:41 GMT -5
By a score of 16-7, the league has voted NOT to reseed the playoffs after the wildcard round.
|
|
